How is the organization of information on web sites different from the organization of information in, for instance, books? In newspapers? What conventions do we see on web sites that seem to be taken from print materials? What conventions seem relatively new or different from print-based conventions?

In print media, such as books, newspapers, etc., you have much more room to work with “above the fold.” The initial screen size that you must work with in a web site is much smaller than a two-page magazine spread or a newspaper front page.

Why do the authors of the Web Style Guide recommend “chunking” as an information-organization approach for web pages?

Much like reading a newspaper, people tend to scan when they read web pages. Images first, then large text, then small text. Grouping large amounts of small text together (as in a book) seems unwieldy to a reader, and they will pass over that information. I’ve noticed this problem a lot when it comes to blog writers over in LiveJournal.

What are the three basic organization/information structures for web sites, according to the Web Style Guide?

Linear, Hierarchical, and Web. Linear is the most simple, and is used primarily on training and educational sites. Hierarchical tends to be used the most, as it structures information in a way that is taught in both the educational and corporate arenas. The web structure is designed to be intuitive and to take advantage of the link-based nature of the world wide web, but it ends up being confusing to most users.

Why do the authors of Web Style Guide argue that “contrast is essential” to page design?

High contrast makes things easy to read, as far as text goes. When it comes to graphics, high contrast makes your focus stand out. The less contrast you have, the fuzzier boundaries get, and more opportunity for confusion comes into the picture.

What are “graphic safe dimensions” for web pages?

For printing, the safe dimensions are 560×410.
For screen, the safe dimensions are 760×410.

Read the “Content/Content Organization” recommendations suggested on usability.gov and then identify the established levels of importance of the links on the following pages:

CNN.com – Breaking news and headline/front page stories have the highest priority. The top three links on the vertical navigation bar are World, United States, and Weather.

Planned Parenthood – A “truth” blog, an article about sexuality, and an article about over the counter emergency contraception seem to be the highest priority on this site.

MSU.edu – This site is geared toward separate audiences. Future Students, Current Students, Parents& Families, Faculty & Staff, and Alumni & Donors are this site’s focus.

Microsoft Corporation – On the left navigation bar, Microsoft’s products take the highest priority. On the right, advertisements about how these products can best be used is meant to target specific audiences, much like MSU’s site.

There are standards out there about web pages that suck. There are standards, though far more open, about web pages that rock. In general, these standards are accurate, and continue to apply as the World Wide Web evolves.

However, the core question in dealing with web sites is not if they conform to these standards. The more important question lies in addressing whether or not these websites accomplished their goal. Purpose, as Agent Smith would say, is what links us.

Did the web page have a goal? If so, did it accomplish said goal? How well did it do this? At this point, discussion of search boxes and opening new windows and layout all become important. But, if the website fails to accomplish its intended goal, it automatically sucks.

Auto-suck.

Because of this approach, my web design to this point has been minimalist and utilitarian to the extreme. What fanciness do I need for a home page that is essentially a place for my favorite links? A simple image tag with some text and paragraph markers will suffice for a bio. My blog has always looked good in most of the LiveJournal default layouts. The same is true with my photo album.

Now, I have a new challenge. My semester project will require me to integrate data and imagery in a way that will catch the eye, be enjoyable to my target audience, and not overwhelm them with a too-busy layout.

I hope my web page won’t suck.

I pray to avoid the auto-suck.

What is the World Wide Web?

It’s the most commonly accessed and quickly developing section of the internet. While it has surpassed USENet, IRC, and other areas, it is nearly the youngest member, as well.

The World Wide Web is a network of “home pages” that are scripted in HTML. Each home page references more pages inside its own site, as well as pages in other sites, by using hypertext links. This made a simple, “clickable” interface that made aspects of the internet far more accessible to users.

Five characteristics of the web:

• Coded in HTML, Javascript, PERL, CSS, and other scripting languages.
• Currently focuses on multimedia content.
• Easily updatable
• Accessible to anyone with a connection.
• Despite being dependant on hard, physical machines, it has a nebulous quality to it.