http://www.norisphotos.com/

I will develop a web site with a clean-cut layout and an effective use of space. The photographs that I will post to the website will fit with the overall image of the site and will be pasted effectively without overly asserting themselves.

When I am creating this website, one key element I have in my mind is to show my prospective employers what type of a designer I am. Similar to many other designers, I will upload a wide variety of my work to the website. This will give prospective employers / clients an opportunity to check my works and determine whether I am the right candidate for their needs. My target audience is any potential website owners who do not have the skills to create a beautiful and user friendly website.

The prospective clients are people who are very likely to find their designers through Google Search. It is therefore important to have a website that highlights my ability to create great websites and which has key word that will be picked up by the Google Search function. Another advantage of having a website is that my potential employers can contact me directly and leave me messages if they need more information from me.

To showcase my capability and I will provide potential clients with examples of different types of work, including:

● Web design
● Advertising design
● Graphic design
● Menu design
● Logo design
● Stationary design

They will also know what type of software I am able to use and my education history, by looking at my resume and portfolio. When visitors come to my site, they will first look for work samples to determine if the design fits with what they are looking for or if this person has enough skills to take care of the project,

If a visitor is happy with what s/he sees in my portfolio, s/he will then visit the resume page for more information.

Finally, if my portfolio meets my clients’ expectations, s/he can contact me directly through the contact page. Once the client is in the contact page, there are two choices for him/her to choose from. S/he can copy down my information, contact me by pager or email, or send me a message directly by filling out the contact form on my website.

I will build my website as simple as I can, so that it will take my clients a very short time to load any page. The reason why I will build a website that loads fast is because I will build it with Css, Html, and very little java script. No animation, flash or high resolution picture will be attached to the website. For a portfolio website, a simple build is important. The first benefit is it looks clean, it has enough white space for the visitors to focus on the information I want them to look at. Secondly, for the work samples page, it is a very bad idea to design a website in a complex way as it might take long time for clients to load.

If visitors are having trouble viewing my portfolio, they can probably just click the back button and look for another designer. If the visitor wants to see any complex, flashy design from the designer, they can look at the web design’s work sample, it is unnecessary to show it in the portfolio site. They can always jump to any page by using the primary navigation bar on the upper right corner.

When I start the project I have to decide what the content of my portfolio should be and I have to determine how many pages it will have. Then I will start writing my biography, organizing my resume and portfolio and converting my works into jpg format. I have two ideas on how I should build the page:

1.My first design idea is to show all my work in the first page, so when a visitor gets onto my site, they will see what they are looking for without any clicks.
2.My second design is to show my biography on the first page, and provide my contact information in the lower right corner in every page. The reason why I put contact information in every page is because I think this is the most important part of the website.

I have finally decided to use my second design for several reasons. First, as a design student, I think showing a biography on the index page is better than showing all you work samples on it. The underlying reason is because you might not have enough work to show to your visitors.

The Internet is a revolution that has impacted people’s lives in a really positive way. When I was growing up there was no such thing as the Internet or mobile phones and I did not know that computers and technology would have such an impact on our lives. But in 2009, computers, technology and the Internet are all now part of our everyday living. These new forms of communication are making life better for a lot of people, in particular, disabled communities. But, as much of the writing about web design shows, it also requires a new way of thinking to engage users. A lot of people do not like to use certain website because they don’t find them user-friendly. Therefore, successful web design will be a result of result of re-thinking how we present information.

The three articles that I would like to discuss are very interesting, because they acknowledge that to use the Internet effectively, we as web developers and designers need to rethink how we approach online development. As Sarah Horton in “Beauty is Only Screen Deep” writes, “people use the web to buy things, find information, make contacts and what they notice is whether they can successfully buy things, find information and make contacts.” Unless a website makes it easy for people to do these things, then the website will be only window dressing and will probably frustrate users.

There are many aspect of the user experience when it comes to the web, and sometimes common sense is not enough to distinguish what the difference is between a good user experiences and a bad one. The most real example for me, being a deaf person, is in the article, “Deafness and the User Experience.” Lisa Herrod writes that captioning for film and news can be mistranslated. A straight translation of a scene or activity that may be on-screen on the web or on the TV, does not always convey the meaning of what is happening on screen. A direct translation is how a hearing person thinks! The web has been revolutionary is enabling disabled communities to interact with the world in a way that was not possible before the Internet revolution, but it requires a new way of thinking to make the experience relevant for them.

In Ann Light’s article “Designers’ Roles in Communicating with Users” she writes that defining the user experience can be difficult because there are many definitions to what that might mean. The move away from giving the reader ‘vertigo’, she explains there are three general categories of work when creating the user experience:

• Information Architecture – an underlying organization system for the information the product is trying to convey.
• Interaction Design – the way that structure if presented to its users.
• Identity Design – amplifies the product’s personality and attraction.

The importance of this article to me was that people will try to make patterns in data to understand what they are seeing. If we as web designers and developers want to design successful web sites, then we need to make sure we are clear in the patterns we want people to understand. It must relate to the purpose of the website.

Sarah Horton in her provides some great advice on how to rethink the presentation of information on the web. She admits that until recently, she did not really “get” the web. She says that she thought her job as a web designer “was all about looking good, delighting the eye and imposing established design conventions on the user.” Her argument is that looking good is not the point of the web. People will have different needs and you cannot try and develop a site only referencing traditional good design principles. As she says “the web was built to flex and flow, and our efforts to hold it in place wind up stifling its potential.”

She talks a lot about ‘text.’ Many web designers use graphic text to present information, but plain text may be the better option. People need to change the text into a format that they need versus text looking beautiful and it is easier to do this with plain text.

The user interface experience is very complex and is not one-dimensional. It will require a re-think on the part of web designers and developers if they are to really realize the potential of the Internet. I am deaf, and I love the Internet, but I think there will be better way to present information for me, that will also be good for hearing people.

I think it is very true that people are generally not happy with too much change. They tend to like change only when things are not working, the recent election of President Obama is a good example. But in most cases, consumers like their products and service to not change. There are lots of examples of this, ‘New Coke’ is a good example and my friends also tell me that ‘Windows Vista’, the latest Microsoft update is not a positive change. There is an old saying, “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it”.

Why do developers and designers want to put their customer base through the trauma of updating websites, software packages and other online applications?

The articles by Sergio Paluch, “Dealing with Radical User Experience Redesigns” and “Facebook Effectively Rolls out Experience Redesign” are two articles that make a lot of sense to me. Paluch is clear that ‘almost all user experience redesigns will be unpopular with some people’ and ‘the more substantial the changes, the greater is the possibility that it will strike discord with user, causing them to abandon the product of service’. He then argues there are four key issues that lead to this discord:

• Anxiety
• Shock
• Disappointment
• Confusion

If you have users experiencing one or any of the above in response to changes made to your website or product then you risk losing business. Paluch describes what happens with each of these reactions and then outlines how web developers should critique their desire to change.

He outlines the following:

1. Make only changes that really will benefit users.
2. Let users know what improvements will be made and why.
3. Give users a preview of the new design.
4. Make sure that users will perceive the changes as beneficial in the short-term as well as long-term.
5. Give users aids such as tool tips, tutorials or an overview of changes.
6. Give users the option to continue using the old version.

He does not provide any evidence for why any of these will work, but they do sound like a sensible list of points for anyone to consider before they change their website. The two that I think make the most sense are 1 and 6.

Web developers and designers will always be looking for new or cool ways to do things, but if you have a good customer following and people are coming back to your site, then you really need to consider point 1 very carefully. I would add to this and say that customers should also be asking for changes to functionality. If you are improving the use of the site overall and solving a problem, then it would seem to make sense to make the change. But small changes over time is a better approach than a ‘big bang’, doing too much at once.

Point 6 is also very important, if users do not want to go with the new system, then they should give them the option to use the old system. And this is the point that Paluch speaks to in his second article “Facebook Effectively Rolls out Experience Redesign.”

I’m not an active user of on Facebook, but I do have some experience with it. When Facebook went to make changes to it’s format, it gave users the option of reverting to the old site if they did not like the new site. Even though Paluch is able to point to a chart that shows 55% to 40% of users reverting to the old Facebook site, at least they were able to revert to their preference. If there has been no ability to use the old site, Facebook may have seen a number of those who like to old Facebook cancelling their user membership with the site. By giving users the option to choose between using a new and older version the results are probably better versus having a new site only.

I am sure it will take more time for the users to fully switch over to the new version, but in this imperfect world there will still be a percentage of users that will not change to the new version no matter what. Not everyone like changes to what they’re already used to. And every time a website makes changes and redesign there will always be the positive and negative user experiences. However, we can try to eliminate the negative experiences by making sure that new changes are not a surprise by following a series of steps that thoughtfully plan out the change before implementation.

Noriyuki Kuroda

The author, Lisa Herrod, makes the case that web designers should consider the Deaf community as a distinct culture versus a ‘disabled’ population. The article is focused on the author’s experience with the deaf community and her understanding that the Deaf community is a “linguistic and cultural minority group, similar to an ethic community.” She uses the big D, as you would the big I for the Italian community, the big C for the Chinese community and so on.

This is an important understanding as the present understanding from the web community is that deafness is the opposite of blindness. If we make audio captioning available, as we do alt text on an image for the blind, we have solved the usability issues for the deaf.

This oversimplification is the wrong approach for designing web content for the Deaf community. Herrod does point out that in the last 18 months, the web community has become more aware of deafness and how it influences the design of web pages. But this focus is still on captioning, “transcription of speech and important sound effects” and subtitling which is “written translation of dialogue”.

Herrod goes further to make several points that all web designers should consider.

The first point is that in the Deaf community they “speak” sign language. Sign languages are ‘visual-spatial’ and many elements of these languages do not have a natural written form. Deaf people rely heavily on facial expression to convey essential meaning and emphasis, and there is no direct written translation for these meanings and emphasis.

Another important point is that direct translation will not always work, phonetic based language i.e. English, can be mid-leading. Herrod uses the example of the phrase, “once in a blue moon”. This phrase means occasionally or once in a while, but when translated into a signed language, the meaning of blue moon can be ambiguous or misleading.

English as a language uses many synonyms while there are very few used in signed languages. Sign languages rely more on facial expression or body language than it does on other words with similar meaning.

These are all important points that present a challenge for anyone designing for the web.

Herrod does make a case for several solutions to this problem. There is no single solution, but there are several things that can make a website more user friendly for the Deaf community:

• Reference Writing for the Web 101
• Use more multimedia

These suggestions are very important and would make any website that is being targeted to the deaf community more usable for them. The use of multimedia is really key, as a deaf person, I always rely on any medium with video or visual access. It is hard to understand from written language what is the meaning. Also, as a Japanese native speaker, the point of a discussion always come first, this makes communication much easier. Once you establish what you are talking about, it is easier to comprehend.

This is a very good article because Lisa Herrod has really attempted to explain what the Deaf community is about. The concept that it is a community, with their own language should be the starting point web design.

So much is happening for Web site design and it seems to get bigger and better every year.  Below are a few highlights of what is happing now from reading “Designing Accessible Websites“, “6 New Web Technologies of 2008 You Need to Use Now“and “Web grief: funeral webcasts gain in popularity”.  I will be trying to follow these method in the future as a web designer.

“Designing Accessible Websites” by Brooke Marshall

This is a really exciting article to me.  The article, an interview with Dan Rubin and Chris Heilmann, Web designers who ‘live and breath’ Web accessibility, explains what Web designers should know about making Web sites accessible to people with disabilities.  Rubin and Heilmann argue that Web designers think they will not be able to use cool technologies if they have to take into consideration people with disabilities.  Their approach has been to look at the cool technologies and make them accessible.  They also outline that “an accessible website is a well designed website – one that far more people than the disabled can enjoy.”

The elements of successful web design that Rubin and Heilmann talk about are important to understand.  They use BBC Ouch! as an example of good accessible design, it looks no different to other websites, but it offers text-only and high-contrast versions.  BBCOuch! also write transcript that makes sense to users with disabilities, the example they use of a stick man with a walking stick, about to face all the other non-disabled stick figures at Christmas shopping time.

Rubin and Heilmann are really asking us to be thoughtful as designers and not think that we have to do things that differently to create a website that is useable for people with disabilities.  We don’t need to use software to convert text to Braille, we can simply enlarge text on screen.  This not only assists with sight impaired users, but enlarged text is also useful to people with cerebral palsy, Parkinson’s disease, muscular dystrophy or stroke, as they cannot use a mouse with precision.

This article also highlights that if you don’t build a web site with accessibility, you are losing a potential customer base of 40 million people and may also be at risk of not meeting obligations with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

“6 New Web Technologies of 2008 You Need to Use Now” by Michael Calore

This article is a check on the technologies that in 2008, have hit ‘center-stage’.  This is a helpful update for those who are looking to design Web pages that are at the cutting edge of Web technology.

The first is Identity Management, the ability to manage your online identity in a simple but secure way.  Three technologies, OpenID, Google Friend, Facebook Connect are all helping manage online identity.  They allow you to manager your “friend data” as well as offering you one virtual ID card to allow you to access the many sites you may be using.  No more multiple logins will be necessary.  However, this is a little risky, in case someone steals your identity..what happens then?

HTML5, while not fully available, it making a big impact on the Web.  It will become the dominate programming language and represents progress on the standardization of key functions, including drag and drop, in-line editing of text and images, and animation.  It will also move away from plug-ins.

Lifestreaming will help people manage the amount of data they have available to them from the various networks they use; social-network activity aggregators. These are explained as ‘funnels’ that will take all your notifications, feeds, updates and put them into one ‘master stream’.  These sites include FriendFeed, Plaxo Pulse and Digsby.

My personal favorite is Firefox 3.  This awesome browser arrive in June 2008, with faster browser use than every before.  As you start to type in what you are looking for the browser searches your history and bookmarks and will bring the web page your are looking for instantaneously.

Google Chrome isolates web applications inside each of the browser’s tabs, isolating any damage from a crash to that tab.  Not yet ready for Mac and Linux, but coming soon.

And for those who need to know and let you know, there instant whereabouts, Location Awareness is becoming a ‘requirement of any serious, successful web service.’  No matter where you are, this service will provide you with all the information of what is available at your location (movies, best pizza, comic shops) and will synch your location with your online social network.

All of this is going to make for an even more connected, aware 2009.

“Web grief: funeral webcasts gain in popularity“  by Kantele Franko

Allowing loved ones who cannot be present at a funeral to attend via the Web has been a niche service for several years now.  Better technology and cheaper equipment are allowing this service to be offered more broadly.  Not sure if this is a service I want to ever have to use, but I can understand how it could become more necessary.

“The Best Websites are Useful and Ugly“  by Gerry McGovern

This was a very interesting topic to me, as it really makes a good point on how we use websites.  Gerry McGoven is arguing that the drawback of great beauty is a lack of functionality.  He writes that the Grand Canyon is a beautiful location but not the easiest place to live.  His point is that webpages with beautiful text may not be the easiest to read.  The most successful websites are some of the ugliest.  The examples that he uses are Ryanair, eBay, Amazon, Google, Craig’s List, my Space and YouTube.

He argues these websites are easy to use because of their ‘ugly’ quality.  It is easier for people to read online, large black text.  This large black text is not as attractive as small fonts.  McGovern does have a point, I use Amazon, Google and YouTube often.  They are very useful websites and they provide me with the information I need instantly.  When you arrive at these ‘ugly‘ websites you will find a page with simply layout, everything loading fast, and no extra buttons that confuse you.  As a buyer myself, I think this is a good way for a website to operate.  I also think it is smart to not have a Flash website, it will definitely take a lot more time to load.  Remember, people looking for a service that is cheap and convenient do want an easy to use website.  Spending time waiting for beautiful images to load is only taking the consumer away from what they want to get from the site.

While I agree that the author has a good point, I think it is also an incredibly blinkered view.  Although he points out a number of recent design trends, ‘the greying of the web’, damage usability, I do not think that a website has to be ‘ugly’ to be  to be useable. I also thought that the post smacked of the attitude that usability is all important.  I do not believe this to be entirely true. Usability has to be balanced with numerous other considerations including brand identity and design aesthetics.  The examples that McGoven gives are all ‘cheap’ consumer items.  If you are running a premium or specialist organization or business, the look and feel has to reflect the value of the organization.  If you are an advertising organization and you have a ‘ugly’ website, you may risk alienating customers looking for a more up-market experience.

“Obama Defeats McCain by Brooke Marshall“ by Brooke Marshall

While reading this article, I had to ask myself the question, did Obama win because his Website was better than McCain’s?  I don’t think so, but as Brooke Marshall points out, there were a lot of features that made it a better experience.  People were going to his Website anyway, change had come to America.  When they got there, the quality of the design made them believe that it was the right change.

Marshall makes that case that the design is an important distinction between the two candidates by breaking out each element of the webpage.  Round 1, The ‘First Impression’, or Header is where the differences between the two candidates starts.  While Obama and Biden look well positioned and integrated into their ‘hopeful’ website, McCain and Palin are not proportioned correctly and look like a bad photoshop job.  I think this is true, but both use attractive background for the banners.

Round 2 is the Menu and Search Tool functionality.  McCain wins on the Search tool because he has one, Obama’s site did not.  Obama wins on the menu design, the font size and color were just right and the menu was easy to use regardless of screen size.  McCain’s website was clunky and cheesy.

Round 3 and 4 go to Obama, he wins on both color and design.  Obama uses the right colors tastefully and combines that with a design that is thoughtful, non-clutter and big on attention to detail (Silverslight as an example).  McCain’s page does not use a consitent approach to color and is easily let down by the opening pages use of Flash animation.

Round 5 is Obama’s, he uses lots of multi media and depending on your taste, the site can cater to your needs.  McCain’s team wasn’t even thinking here, and as Marshall points out, the automatic video streaming is annoying and you are ready to move on.

Round 6, MyBO’s social networking is a killer and there is not much point in explain why.

Back to my initial question, did Obama win because of his webpage?…..well no.  But it is the professionalism and classy approach to using the Web in the campaign that highlights how smart the new President is in his use of this media.  The world has changed and voters have changed.  Obama knew that, and provided his followers with a web experience that back-up his public message and indicated that he wasn’ti isolated from what was happening out there in the real world.  The web was not an after thought, it was part of the Obama experience, the team understood how to engage support using the Web as a key tool while reinforcing his image of change.

This author is pretty tough on McCain, but the points are valid and overall, McCain’s team did not have the experience to enter the digital age looking compentent.