While completing the last task in Module 4 Searching the Web, I came across this an amazing web app Diigo.
Essentially it's a cross between social bookmarking and a research/reference tool where as you can not only bookmark a site, but highlight words or leave a sticky note with annotations ON THE PAGE for future reference. Diigo bills itself as a research tool and knowledge sharing community. While I haven't had a full play with it yet it's free to set up an account so hopefully tomorrow I shall be able to poke around and see how it works.
The ingenuity of people on the web never ceases to amaze me!
Showing posts with label www. Show all posts
Showing posts with label www. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Module 3 - WWW Standards
This current module regarding WWW Standards and usability has thrown up some very interesting reading courtesy of Jakob Nielsen and ultimately raised a few more questions for me.
As tasked, I read through through a large chunk of the related material on Nielsen's website Useit.com and also went trawling through the other recommended readings at Dennis Jerz's site and a good piece at Web Style Guide. While there were a few discrepancies between sites, all concurred on what could be described as the principals for writing on the web. I found that these principles could be broken down into the following points.
* Write scanable text - Use highlighted keywords, bulleted text and meaningful sub-headings.
* Reduce the word count - Reduce the overall words used in your writing.
* One idea per paragraph - Keep your paragraphs simple.
* Use simple langauge - Avoid marketese, write for a broad audience.
* Utilise an inverted pyramid writing style - Conclusion first and then expand from there.
I found Nielsen to come for the internet marketers angle. While I believe his theories and studies still hold some weight, his approach is to that of the conversion of readers and visitors to your site into sales of your product. The question which I feel this raises is: Are these approaches applicable to Web 2.0 social internet, blogs or opinion pieces? Does all web content need to be broken down and made scanable to be successful? If so, I think the web would be a much duller place to visit. Fellow Net11 student Kieth makes some interesting further observations about this point in his own blog.
So yes there are times where having the information scanable is pertinent, and I have taken away some very good tips on making my own writing more readable for the net. Yet still I find that if I have found an interesting and well written piece, it will engage me regardless of if it's chunked down with bullet lists and concise headings. The net is a constant and changing place. Making it more usable is not a bad thing, but at the sake of content, opinion, thought, interaction. That's not the internet I want to experience.
What about you, what kind of internet do you want to experience?
As tasked, I read through through a large chunk of the related material on Nielsen's website Useit.com and also went trawling through the other recommended readings at Dennis Jerz's site and a good piece at Web Style Guide. While there were a few discrepancies between sites, all concurred on what could be described as the principals for writing on the web. I found that these principles could be broken down into the following points.
* Write scanable text - Use highlighted keywords, bulleted text and meaningful sub-headings.
* Reduce the word count - Reduce the overall words used in your writing.
* One idea per paragraph - Keep your paragraphs simple.
* Use simple langauge - Avoid marketese, write for a broad audience.
* Utilise an inverted pyramid writing style - Conclusion first and then expand from there.
I found Nielsen to come for the internet marketers angle. While I believe his theories and studies still hold some weight, his approach is to that of the conversion of readers and visitors to your site into sales of your product. The question which I feel this raises is: Are these approaches applicable to Web 2.0 social internet, blogs or opinion pieces? Does all web content need to be broken down and made scanable to be successful? If so, I think the web would be a much duller place to visit. Fellow Net11 student Kieth makes some interesting further observations about this point in his own blog.
So yes there are times where having the information scanable is pertinent, and I have taken away some very good tips on making my own writing more readable for the net. Yet still I find that if I have found an interesting and well written piece, it will engage me regardless of if it's chunked down with bullet lists and concise headings. The net is a constant and changing place. Making it more usable is not a bad thing, but at the sake of content, opinion, thought, interaction. That's not the internet I want to experience.
What about you, what kind of internet do you want to experience?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
