It’s been quite quiet around here lately, but I just had to post this gem.
Talisman Energy’s web site welcomes you with the words:
Conditions for Viewing this Site.
Say no more … or perhaps maybe just the note:
NOTE: Clicking on “Accept” will enable you to view the rest of this website without having to “Accept” again within 30 days.
These people must have understood something that I missed.
You have probably already heard about the Norwegian campaign to end IE6. If not, see Ajaxian or Wired.
Although I sure hope that we (and in particular, me 
) will spend less time on making web sites work perfectly in IE6 during 2009 than previous years, I don’t think we’ve seen the last of this dreadful browser. Read the full post »
During a workshop on accessibility and WAI yesterday, the issue of proper use of HTML headings came up.
Lots of sites fall short when it comes to using HTML headings (and other elements) properly, something that can affect accessibility, search engine ranking, as well as code maintenance [not to forget future re-use on the grand Semantic Web].
How – and where – to properly use the elements might not always be that clear, and some of the questions raised during the discussion can be rephrased as:
What follows is my 2 cents on the subject.
I wonder how many of Windows Live Hotmail’s members knows how to delete the temporary Internet files in their browser’s cache.
“What’s ‘cache’, anyways?”, I’m sure thousands of users ask themselves.
Screen shot of Windows Live Hotmail not loading.
Haha! They brought this one on themselves.
(I still remember the e-mails we used to receive at Lingo)
Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Think, a quick and good read btw, made me aware of an article entitled Guidelines for Accessible and Usable Web Sites: Observing Users Who Work.
The article gives good insight into why it is important to do things right on the front end (Norwegian literates should read Kuttisme.no’s checklist on good quality UIs).
One thing that has crossed and stuck on my mind lately, is how information is presented on topic maps based web portals.
Topic Maps based portals typically, or should I say obviously, use a subject centric approach for presenting information: every page presents information about a subject (represented by a topic in the topic map).
And most topic maps based portals lay out the information about those subject in much the same way:
(In addition to this, the left column will most likely consist the standard global navigation menu).
Let’s take a look at a few examples:
Screen shot of government.no.
Screen shot of bergen.kommune.no.
Screen shot of www.forskning.no.
Now, what’s interesting is that one of the most interesting parts of the topic map (as far as I consider), the part that enables associative navigation and makes a difference compared to other technologies; the associations, are placed in the right column — a common spot for banner ads and less-important/interesting information that users have learned to overlook.
This makes me wonder: has anyone ever done user testing on topic maps based portals that might reveal how many users use the associative feature of topic maps – excluding the use of menus and the like?
How many users figure that the right column holds interesting information about related subjects and actually click these links?
I doubt topic maps based portals are wide spread enough for users to know that the associations are of interest — and in any way, which user knows – or cares – what goes on behind the scenes? And does it even matter, as long as the site is usable (in general)?
I am pretty sure it is important (as always) to use effective visual cues in order to direct the user’s attention towards the associations. Some of the examples above do better at presenting the associations visually — forskning.no almost appears to be hiding them, while bergen.kommune.no‘s approach doesn’t seem too bad — for user’s to spot them while scanning the page for useful information. Still, it makes me wonder …
@twitter