Designer's Corner: Who Watches the Watchers?
by Heather Champ
Everyone on the Web has an opinion, and in most cases is not at a loss to express themselves.
What I appreciate most about the Web is that everyone has an opinion, and in most cases is not at a loss to express themselves. Unlike mass media, an individual, in most instances, has the opportunity to respond, comment on, or participate in the dialogue that is the Web. Glenn Davis evolved this idea of opinion into what today is a minor Web industry when he created the original Cool Site of the Day in August of 1994.
His daily choice provided a service that enabled users to zero in, with a minimum of fuss and bother, on those sites that were worthy of a visit.
This simple concept developed into a phenomenon from which has sprung a thriving industry of sites that direct users to points of interest. Yahoo lists 226 "Sites of the..." (www.yahoo.com/Computers_and_Internet/
Internet/World_Wide_Web/Best_of_the_
Web/Sites_of_the___/) in various categories from daily to annual picks.
It was only a matter of time before a few Web developers pounced on this idea and turned it on its head to point us to those which were the antithesis of cool...sites that suck! The Point's Top 5% site has at least ten imitators, with variations including the "bottom 5%", "the bottom 95%" and "the bottom of the net." In some instances, it's difficult to tell whether imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, or outright copyright violation.
The number of sites and individuals that rate other Web sites far outstrips the number of sites that cull the dark corners of the Web for poor design. It's interesting to note that the number of these "Worst of..." sites is shrinking. Both Mirsky's Worst of the Web and Mediocre Site of the Day, two of the original and most fêted bottom dwellers, are on permanent hiatus.
Mirsky's site states "When I started the site, almost two years ago, I'd hoped it would eventually provide me with financial independence and greater creative opportunities. Neither happened." A number of additional "worst of" sites, including Cob Web Site of the Day, Crappy Site of the Day, and Depressing Site of the Day have gone "404" (file not found). It may be true that vanishing acts are occurring in the "best of's" as well. Most people don't realize that though it may seem easy to pick just one site on a daily basis, at times it can be rather trying, and over an extended period of time, downright stressful.
Surf To Learn
While "view source" is still one of the best ways to determine how designers and developers are doing things, there are an ever growing number of resources both on and offline. But not everyone has the opportunity to publish in print their "bible" on "how-to," and given that advancements in browser- and Web-related technology are moving faster than the speed of light, it's quite possible that a publication may be out of date by the time it rolls off the presses. Many print houses are in a rush to fill the void, but this quick turnaround time can lead to errors. I've yet to purchase a Web-related publication that doesn't have mistakes, which leads to moments of frustration until the bugs are discovered.
Online, designers and developers are sharing their skills and research, and it's now possible to find help, tips, tricks and examples of how to do almost anything that one might encounter while surfing the Web. Being on the Web enables a site to update in response to new media in technology developments. Designers and developers like to pride themselves that they are just ahead of the curve when it comes to embracing the latest enhancements, versions, etc. of tools or tags. While these "Sites of..." Web sites can provide road signs as to whether a site is good or bad, there is usually no accompanying commentary as to why a particular site was selected, as there is typically only a link to the site in question.
There are a growing breed of sites that are beginning to try and flesh out this opinion, teaching by example of either what's cool or what sucks. Yahoo lists 59 entries in their( World Wide Web: Page Design and Layout section ).
Plowing Through the Muck, or, Web Pages That Suck
Vincent Flanders' Web Pages that Suck is very much a site of the moment. There is a certain fascination in plowing through the litany of sites listed for having transgressed seemingly every boundary of good taste and healthy Web hygiene.
Unfortunately, so much of Mr. Flanders' advice seems to have been shot from the hip in one-liners without fleshing out or creating examples that show how to avoid these potholes of bad design. It's easy to say "keep it simple, make it elegant, keep the images small, etc." But without providing a key to the alternative, not much can be learned.
It was disappointing to discover a major faux pas, in that the external links within the "Awards" section remain trapped within the frame set. Targeting the documents either to open in a new window or including a target="_top" attribute within the <a href> tag to display the site within the complete browser window would have been a more polite way to thank these sites for their recognition.
Recent e-mail proffered a URL for what is sure to be a controversial solution to cleaning up cyberspace. The Internet Trashcan offers a unique service, in that they will contact the webmaster of any site that a user feels should be "trashed." Once a site has been submitted, these would-be garbagemen of the Web will e-mail the unwitting offenders and urge them to take their site offline. "Emptying is a dirty job, so we do it for you. All holders of submitted pages receive an email stating that they have been added to the Internet Trashcan a number of times. We hope they get the hint!" This seems outrageous, and though appealing for its humor quotient, it really is suspect. If you visit the home page of the creators, you will discover that perhaps they should trash their own trash can before they become victims themselves.
But, just who are these people, these arbiters of what's cool and what sucks? What qualifications do they have? In that Web design and development are a relatively new industry, even the most seasoned designer or developer has no more than just over two years' experience under their belt.
In some cases, Web designers are drawing from years of experience in traditional forms of media; in others, very little experience, other than a home page at college where they learned the tricks of the trade. There is more to the making of a good (better yet, great) Web designer than having the latest WYSIWYG editor at hand.
The Web itself is the best educator. Visit the sites listed in television commercials, subscribe to a Web design listserv to catch the latest buzz on who's using what to create which site. Surf as much as possible, as through visiting sites, it becomes possible to develop your own aesthetic opinions. Granted, there are some universal truths (for example, bandwidth issues and "internet safe" colors which should be observed), but time, experimentation, and user feedback are by far the best ways to become a better Web designer.
Heather Champ is a lecturer and free-lance writer. If you'd like to get to know her better, stop by Jezebel, her personal Web site.
Reprinted from Web Developer® magazine, Vol. 3 No.2 Mar/Apr 1997 (c) 1997 internet.com Corporation. All rights reserved.
Web Developer® Site Feedback
Web Developer®
Copyright © 2000 internet.com Corporation. All rights reserved.
