Re: Target browsers for web development

Not when David's definition of education doesn't fit a standard
definition of education. Having worked in the education field quite a
bit, I can tell you from experience that most educators and
participants in educational programs don't feel that it has to do with
relinquishing control, but rather gaining control. I simply don't agree
with David's view on "education." And to clarify what education is, I
used a true definition. When you don't know or aren't clear on the
meaning of a word, it's amazing how much a dictionary can help.

Second, I don't agree that a user should never be told that their
system isn't up to spec, or is sub-standard, or is 8 years old. I do
agree that you shouldn't do it in a non-user-friendly manner. Going
back to education, if nobody ever tells the user that they need to
upgrade something then how will they know. I don't know about you guys,
but in our research on observation, there are a lot of users who don't
know they can upgrade their browser, or why they should. Once we've
shown them how easy it is and the benefit that come from it they're
typically overjoyed that they did.

Case in point, we had a person two weeks ago that thought Java and
JavaScript was the same thing. I can see how this can be confusing
since the names are very similar. They thought that they had to have
either both disabled or enabled. They thought that they had to have JS
disabled in order to prevent annoying Java Applets from running. Once
we "educated them" about the differences of the two and what each one
is used for they were very happy to be informed, left Java disabled and
turned JavaScript on, then downloaded a PopUp killer application from
Versiontracker.com -- all on their own without any instruction from us
on how to do this. They were glad to be "educated." And at no point in
time did we "take the controls away from them."

And my original message stated that we do let users use the site/app
even with "sub-standard" systems, as you put it. We inform them that
their current browser doesn't support standards (with a link to explain
what Web standards are in laymen's terms), that while they won't get
the "pretty design" they still have access to all the content for the
entire system regardless of the browser or device. So, they get to use
the product just fine. And it's only about 2-3% that see this.

I simply don't agree with your definition and viewpoint on educating
the user. I don't think it's realistic and I don't think it's correct
based on our research and common HCI principles. You're completely
ignoring one of the key principles of Usability - learnability.

On Thursday, April 10, 2003, at 02:03  AM, William Hudson wrote:

> Todd, breaking out the dictionary is just way to pedantic don't ya
> think. My point still stands w/o the literalism you are projecting.
> Take
> the word education out and put in intervening or similar more
> descriptive term.
>
> Users should never be told their system is "sub-standard" in the way
> being presented and they should never be exposed to anything resembling
> technological lingo like standards. Just let them use the bloody
> site/app. It's all they care about.

Cheers!

Todd R. Warfel

_//message first [method second]
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.
_//user experience architect
Information architecture
Interaction design
Usability analysis
[P] (607) 339-9640
[E]  [email protected]
[w] http://www.messagefirst.com
.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.==.--.

In theory, theory and practice are the same,
but in practice, they're not .

The only thing necessary for evil to exist in the world is for good men
to do nothing.

    --------------------------------------------------------------
     POSTINGS (in plain text): [email protected]
           SUBSCRIPTION CHANGES:  http://lists.syntagm.co.uk
            (or send email to mailto:[email protected])
    --------------------------------------------------------------