Comments on: On web design

By: In search of a better way to design at Metaﬂuence

In search of a better way to design at Metaﬂuence — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 02:10:52 +0000

[...] I’ve recently been writing a few posts about the evolution of web design, particularly the impact of rich media, namely Flash, on modern web design. Other web design thinkers, such as Jeff Croft, have also been thinking about the new era of web design and the problems we need to address. [...]

By: Justin

Justin — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 19:03:54 +0000

Michael, thanks for the compliment on the dbclay site. :) You make a great point about accessibility. I think rich media, like Flash, should be offered as progressive enhancement. Pop Stalin, I think you are right that we will never lose the grid, especially since the computer screen itself is a box. I would like to see web designers explore more fundamental organizational structures in addition to the grid.

By: Pop Stalin Design

Pop Stalin Design — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 16:04:44 +0000

Hey Justin, I followed you here from 9Rules and came across this older entry.

I think the one problem with web design is how people view it. Instead of seeing it as an electronic form of print, I think it needs to be viewed more like television but that’s just my opinion.

That being said, whether it print, web or television it’s all a box model. In photography/cinematography there is the grid, in print and web design there is the grid. Everything has to do with the grid and until holograms became a common everyday occurence I don’t see design being able to bust outside the grid (which in itself is just a big box).

Anyway, great discussion!

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 06 Jan 2007 22:09:53 +0000

Justin, first let me say nice job on the db clay site, it is one of the prettiest e-com sites I’ve seen.

But on the topic of evolving the web, I want to point out that the web sprung out ot a desire to 1) allow many platforms to share data and 2) speed client-server. Now as it has become so popular, two new goals have been added: 3) high entertainment value and 4) simplify contribution.

My concern is that maximizing all four of these goals is intractable and as a champion of 1 & 2, I don’t want to see the market demand of 3 & 4 push them aside.

A lot of my clients are rural folks with limited bandwitdh and education. It’s always intersting to me when I sit down behind their windows 98 PC on a dial up connection and try to troubleshoot a problem with my web 2.0 solution.

Personally, I liked the idea of creating parallel “nets” but you don’t hear that being bandied about anymore. My point is I don’t keep the kids books on the same shelf as my SQL reference book, so why is myspace showing up on my Google results when I want a script for setting today’s date?

My $0.02 worth.

By: Justin

Justin — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 19:47:42 +0000

Nate I think you’re right on that our job as web developers is to make strategic decisions about what tool(s) are right for the job. The sign of good design isn’t Frankenmash-ups.

By: Nate K

Nate K — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 16:42:36 +0000

I always enjoy conversations like this myself. My overall feelings is that there are different tools for different jobs. Not everything needs to be a mashup of all available technologies - but it needs to meet the needs of the goals of the site. To me, design is not about using all available bells and whistles - its about solving problems. Sometimes Flash is the appropriate tool (video, audio), sometimes it’s a much simpler solution. Not everything needs AJAX, not everything needs Flash. It’s about solving problems.

The issue with XML is that it never really caught on (with the majority of developers). There have been many different discussions about how to organize the content, presentation, and behavior layers - and everyone has a different idea opinion. I just think stretching too far from the norm, or radically transforming things at this point would be counter-productive (especially to the people still designing sites as if they were in the 90’s - they simply don’t want to change).

At the core it is a big challenge. So many technologies, how do we bring them together in a clean fashion?

By: Mr. Diggles

Mr. Diggles — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 07:13:50 +0000

1. universal browser solution.
2. broader web standards for the sake of media demands.
3. kill bill.

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 30 Nov 2006 19:30:41 +0000

Here is the link to the mozilla tamarin project.

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/

What does this mean? Where will it lead? What does this mean for the many “camps” (for lack of a better term) in terms of finding middle ground? I don’t know, but it could be a another revolution waiting to happen.