If you’ve been around you may have seen that I’ve been adding to my bookmarks. I think that list follows the same theme of: things interesting to a front end web geek (i.e. me).

Anyway all of that’s what the point is not, I’m here today to mark the event that was @media 2008. I took notes until my fingers ached (I’ve found it makes my brain remember) and talked to my fellow attendees with my usual passion. I want to get through the 49 pages of scrawl and blog as much as possible, if only to spread the word amongst my new work colleagues, but also to complete a bit of collaboration with my forward thinking friends at Black Marble (we split up between the two conference tracks and reported back).

Having attended many of the design focussed presentations, the theme that came through this year (especially on the first day) was centered around remembering to tell the story. This was a progression on the idea of ‘why?’ that pervades web design (for any new site, there must be a purpose). Through this and more generally I took a great sense from the conference that many of the ideas surrounding our discipline are maturing. Our industry is maturing. The terms that people band about are becoming fleshed out and more widely used. The art and science of web design is gaining a real clarity for me and the general community is now more prepared than ever to take themselves seriously as a ‘proper discipline’ (in the words of Simon Willison, he got an applause for that!).

So ‘Hi’ to everyone I spoke to, this has probably been one of the best conferences I’ve been to, I hope you think so too.

This post is of a rarely personal nature and only a stub for the main message. I’m hoping to point people there over the coming months.

Friends, family and other interested people - I’m running the London Marathon 2008 and I’d appreciate your help. I’m aiming to raise money for WaterAid. This charity helps to provide clean drinking water and sanitation to the ‘over a billion people‘ who don’t already have it. The charity itself was also awarded “Britain’s most Admired Charity” in 2006 (according to Wikipedia).

I think it’s a worthy cause and a worthy charity and I hope you’ll agree. Whether you know me or not, you can use this as an excuse to donate as everything you pledge goes straight to the charity through my online donation page. I’ll be leaving a link to the details on the homepage of my site so there’s no excuse, any amount will help. You’ll also make the gruelling 26.2 miles all the more enjoyable! Thanks :)

Eureka! (Sort of). This week the fluoride story broke in the UK, something that could change the way I live for a long time to come. I couldn’t help but see the similarities between these two issues and this prompted the following post (two birds, one stone) - stay with me here…

Contentious

1. Proposal One. Add a tiny meta tag into your code in order to tell IE what iteration of the rendering engine you’d like to use. This is not because you’re doing anything wrong, in fact if you’re reading about it you’re more likely to be a standards aware web developer. It’s catering for the nonconformist (not conforming to accepted rules or standards*). Microsoft has to deal with a lot of fault calls when it updates its browser and would like a cheaper easier option that covers everyone and reduces the size of its headache.
2. Proposal Two. Let the government add a tiny amount of fluoride into your main water supply to help prevent tooth decay. This is not because you’re doing anything wrong, in fact if you’re reading about it you’re more likely to be an individual who’s aware of their dental health. It’s catering for the unaware, those who glug fizzy drinks and forget to brush. British health services have to deal with a lot of the after effects from years of tooth decay. They would like a cheaper and easier option that covers everyone and reduces the size of their headache.

Whether or not you agree with either of these proposals seems less bound with the facts of the situation (or their portrayal) and more reliant on your philosophy of life. Should the conscientious, the responsible make sacrifices to cater for the rest? Should I make small sacrifices with my (as I believe) health or code, to allow for those that can’t look after their own?

The arguments in favour of both are quite compelling. Put simply, implementing these fundamental changes means that in one fell swoop the majority of problems disappear. Web developers no longer need to worry so much about their sites ‘breaking’ in future versions of IE, similarly parents no longer need to worry whether their children are brushing their teeth properly. We’re all now protected due to this change in our environment. Also, it keeps the managers happy. Numerous posts hint to problems (again, see Zeldman’s article) faced by the IE team when trying to justify their apparent divergence from the development path of previous versions of the product (all thanks to ‘web standards’). Given Microsoft’s position in the market and the flak the company seems to get when it releases updates, the ’standards’ argument is supposedly wearing thin with the management. Similarly, the NHS has limited resources and not enough dentists.

Fluoridation is a small addition to the structure of your daily life, if the experts are to be believed it won’t lead to conditions that compromise your health (although some disagree). In fact, if you compare the cost of fluoridation to the bill incurred correcting dental decay, it’ll be better for society in the long term (I guess). It will get us out of the current situation where dentists and GPs waste time and money trying to fix what should have been prevented in the first place. It will free up resources to improve public health in other areas.

Meta tags really are tiny pieces of code that there’s no point getting upset over. The burden incurred implementing this new tag in future sites should be minimal. If we can help Microsoft produce a better browser by relenting to their proposal, then surely that’ll produce a better web for all.

So where’s the problem?

I’m happy that plans are being made and people less fortunate than myself (I currently have no fillings and the time/patience to code properly) are on the verge of being helped. But, when these large organisations make such plans seemingly in my best interests, they sometimes (arrogantly) miss the point in the implementation. Standing behind bloggers such as Jeremy Keith and hopefully adding to the calls, I think both of these proposals need to be opt-in.

In the case of fluoride, it can be provided in salt as has happened in other countries; with the meta tag, let people find out about it only when their sites break (at least that way they’ll understand there’s a problem). Doing it any other way would cheapen life for all (which is funny because these descisions will have come from the economics originally). At least now dentists and Microsoft technical support will have an easy answer, but let people explicitly agree to be included.

Another option is to medicate the Microsoft offices water supply - instead of fluoride put aspirin in their water, that’ll cure their collective headache in the mean time.   ;)

* However, I don’t want to get sucked into a debate about how to define what ‘rules and standards’ means. Molly’s already doing a good job.

So, this got me thinking about the whole concept of the click. What is a click? How central is it really to our experience on the web? Can we do without it? And if it was taken away, what would that web look and feel like? Read on for my research and opinion.

Background, FYI

(For the uninitiated, which included me to some degree). Computer mice and clicking have been with us for a while. The first commercial computer to include a mouse was the Xerox 8010 Star introduced in 1981 (according to Wikipedia, I was only just on the planet at this point so can’t vouch for it). Since then the concept behind clicking has been adapted to other input devices including trackballs, touchpads (generally used on laptops), touchscreens, graphics tablets etc.

Clicking is bound up in the WIMP (Window, Icon, Menu, Pointing device) approach to GUI’s (Graphical User Interfaces) and relates to the user clicking and selecting a part of the screen to activate a command on the computer. Before the GUI and the mouse, text based interfaces were dominant and the return key would be the usual part of the keyboard that did the activating.

Since its development, clicking has been so fundamental in the WIMP world that input devices such as touchscreens have extended the concept to variants such as ‘tapping’ etc. The terms may change based on the user experience but the general interaction remains the same, again due mostly to the unchanging fundamentals of the 2D GUI.

How does this relate to the web?

Clicking helps to define the overall experience of the web. For example, it’s the last action before making a payment to make a purchase. It’s in the modern psyche as an expression of intention. Amazon patented ‘1-Click’ in 1999 as it ‘refers to the technique of allowing customers to make online purchases with a single click’. A lot is happening behind the scenes, but for the user this is reduced to a single action/concept. Other examples would include the proliferation of hyperlinks with explanatory text like ‘click to proceed’, ‘click to pay’ and the dreaded ‘click here’.

It’s always interesting to me how the popular perception of a thing shapes its explanation. This is because, of course, for some ‘1-Click’ is actually ‘1-Press-Return-Key’ or ‘1-Tap’. Clicking doesn’t naturally enter into the experience of a command line user or someone using certain types of assistive technology. What is universal in these examples is the activating of the command to progress to another web page or buy a product. This is a fabulous example of why the link text ‘click here’ is so nonsensical (and on its own so non-descriptive and just lame).

Of course the web is built on the hyperlink and for most clicking has become central to this interaction. Which brings me back to dontclick.it. What happens if the click is taken away? Well, it’s disconcerting at first. However, even though the website is initially a strange experience, I found myself getting used to it quite quickly. This made me wonder why I’d been such a blind follower of the click for so long. I’d never questioned.

Click-less future?

Now onto a general theme for this blog; Apple. They’ve just released the MacBook Air to predominantly positive reviews and despite its other boundary-pushing features, the one they’re most keen to promote on their website is the ‘multi-touch’ gesture support.

For the first time, they’ve brought multi-touch gestures from their successful iPhone and iPod touch products into their main computer offering. Although these features don’t replace the click, they could point to (pun intended) a future without it. What about a Minority Report inspired interface where ‘point and click’ becomes just ‘point’?

For many years, Apple’s relationship with the ‘click’ has been embroiled in the one or two button mouse debate. Seasoned computer users have derided their choice to stick with one button mice and even now their offering is a kind of fudge.

With the correct interface, could the click be superseded by a gesture? Gestures in computing are nothing new. Again, according to Wikipedia, the first mouse gesture was “the ‘drag,’ …introduced by Apple to replace a dedicated ‘move’ button on mouses shipped with its Macintosh and Lisa computers”.

For most, removing the click would have a fundamental impact on the psychology of human computer interaction, as expressed in this quote from the dontclick.it site:

clicks make me think of isolated segments this is immersive.
01.17.2008 msg# 37833 by ‘roger doonan’.

Apart from the psychology, what about accessibility/usability? By extension, some replacement for the mouse (pointing device) could help those with motor control difficulties. i.e. not having to click on exactly the right pixel on the screen. Take it a stage further, replacing the keyboard with a gesture based interface could revolutionalise computer usage for those of us for whom the standard QWERTY keyboard represents a barrier.

The end is in sight

There are lots of interface design problems that would need addressing before the clicking could ever stop. I wonder how complex a system could get before a gesture became indiscrete enough to place ambiguity between it and the user. I also wonder if computer interface designers will ever get to purely gesture based interaction without a paradigm (I got that word in Rik!) shift from creating more and more complex interfaces, towards distilling it right down to what the user actually needs.

These are just my thoughts on what may be to come. As always I’m hoping to add to any discussion that’s taking place, this is not a bid for revolution (although could you imagine an online petition to abandon the click? “Click here to abolish the click!” – wholly hypocritical).

Update 22 February 2008: “Apple Depicts Advanced Multitouch Gesturing Control Panel in Mac OS X” - an article written a couple of days ago about possible developments using muiti-touch.

• If it didn’t make sense the title is a reference to a quote from Harold Wilson, it seemed fitting given Opera’s move against Microsoft. Something that’s provoked a passionate reaction from the likes of Eric Meyer and Andy Clarke, both very aware of the ramifications this is already having on the politics of the web community. Update 17 December 2007: Yesterday Andy posted a follow-up to his suggestion to reform the CSS Working Group, I think due to the incisive response he received. Molly Holzschlag comments and I think she’s in a good position to do so.
• Speaking of politics, this week the BBC Internet Blog posted an article by Jonathan Drori about the difficulties attached to implementing CMS technology across the corporation. He even mentions “fiefdoms” which I think many web managers across the public sector will identify with.
• Totally unrelated and on a happier note, Phil pointed out that the Beta version of Google Maps Mobile can now locate a mobile phone “with or without GPS”. Shame it’s (strangely) not supported on my phone.
• And finally, back in October I watched a presentation over at Mac Learning about the new accessibility features in Mac Leopard. With the recently released answers to questions posted during the session, I was pleased to find my question was included. I asked whether element navigation (what’s this?) is available in browsers other than Safari 3. Unfortunately (and I suppose unsurprisingly) the answer is no. However, I guess the fact that Safari 3 now implements long overdue features such as tabs may be some consolation for this.

What is element navigation? It may not be clear what feature I’m talking about so read on for a brief description. In Leopard using Apple VoiceOver and Safari 3, the user can jump through the page to elements of the same type e.g. all the Headings by type (H1, H2 etc), or links (both picture and text links). I suppose this is useful, I’ve been aware that this has been implemented in other screen readers for some time. Note: Apparently VoiceOver is not a screen reader in that it does not read the screen, it responds to direct programme output. Very clever, *smiles*.

This week I’ve found myself reading Read/WriteWeb more and more. If you’ve not seen it, they produce thought provoking articles on all sorts including some that analyse the past and offer an academic look at the possible future of the web. In the last few days I’ve been contemplating their posts on “Visualizing Social Software Best Practices: Three Approaches” and “Social Graph & Beyond: Tim Berners-Lee’s Graph is The Next Level“. These posts led me to Tim Berners-Lee’s “Giant Global Graph” and Google’s ‘light-hearted’ “Social Design Best Practices“. I found these good for getting to grips with possibilities for the web’s future direction. What’s interesting is that it all seems to tie together the thought as Tim quotes:

It’s not the documents, it is the things they are about which are important

Anecdotally, blue flavor alluded to this last week after recapping on FOWD with the statement ‘content is still king.’. Well actually Tim abstracts this even further by stating it’s what the content is about that’s important, but both follow similar lines by stating the importance of ’situation-appropriate’ web access (another quote from Tim’s post).

So after digesting all of that freely available info, who needs to go to conferences like @mediaAjax? We’ll actually I do and I was quite sociable at the after conference gathering, although I didn’t have the moola to attend the event.

• “New intelligence chief reveals all on website“, 16 November 2007
  The most senior British intelligence official, appointed yesterday to oversee MI5, MI6 and GCHQ, has a website revealing his home address, phone numbers and private photographs of himself, family and friends.
• “Foreign Office web security failed Data Protection Act, says info office“, 13 November 2007
  The Foreign Office has promised to keep data safer in future, after its website exposed the details of those seeking visas for entry into the UK. An investigation by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) found a breach of the Data Protection Act.
• “Lost CD may put pension holders in peril“, 5 November 2007
  Thousands of customers of UK insurer Standard Life have been left at risk of fraud after their personal details were lost by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC).
• “DWP loses £2.5bn to fraud and errors“, 26 July 2007
  Department of Work and Pensions. About £2.5bn was lost to fraud and error in benefit payments over the last year …The report identifies limited IT integration as one reason for the high level of error.
• “DoH’s latest d’oh!“, 26 April 2007
  Department of Health (DoH) has apologised for its latest IT blunder - publishing private details of applicants for junior doctor posts on an unsecured website.

Now… anyone for an ID card?

Update 26 November 2007: The total turned out to be “records for 25 million individuals and 7.25 million families”.

Update 20 December 2007: DH found guilty on MTAS data protection breach - “The Information Commissioner requires the DH to sign a formal undertaking to comply with the principles of the Data Protection Act.” Weren’t they already required to do so by law? Will yet another document make any difference?

This is the first time I’ve seen an introduction to the platform and I must say I think it has acres of potential. Yes it might be later then the rest (Apple’s iPhone has been shipping since the summer, Android isn’t ready for consumers until late 2008), but the same happened with the Wii and, due to it’s unique features, it surprisingly dominates the games console industry. Apple, probably Google’s biggest ‘competitor’ (according to AppleInsider, Google chief Eric Schmidt sits on Apple’s Board of Directors), has redefined the mobile experience but their environment is not open (apps development is only available through Safari) which is why unless they release their grip they’ll never win at fighting the tide.

Conversely, if Google’s open platform can keep what looks like an iPhone inspired interface whilst also fostering innovation, it’ll soak up the demand for next generation handsets that Apple kick-started.

Update, 16 November 07: Google’s Dave Burke gave a presentation on Android at the recent Future of Mobile event held in London on 14 November. Mike Butcher blogged his talk. Although apparently he didn’t say anything new, it’s interesting to note that Android is Linux based with Java running on top. During the presentation Dave created a programme in under 8 minutes, it seems Google is trying to emphasise the ease with which programmes can be created.

Having recently looked at accessibility in Mac OS 10.5 (Leopard) I started playing around with VoiceOver. It’s also included in OS 10.4, which is what I’m using. Having mostly used Windows (90% of the time) over the last few years, testing with a screen reader always seemed beyond my reach given the price. Also, I’d managed to pick up the advice that there’s no point, simply because as I’m sighted, the methods I’d use to interact with a computer would be different to those people using this interface out of necessity. So my previous experience in this area is limited.

Working on a site recently, I decided to get VoiceOver to read it back to me. All seemed fine until it read the phone number. Changed slightly for this example, the number ‘07000 121 022′ was read back to me as “seven thousand, one hundred twenty one, twenty two”. Notice how it misses off the first zeros on the ‘07000′ and ‘022′ sections of the number. Had I not included the spaces, the number ‘07000121022′ would have read as “seven billion, one hundred twenty one thousand, twenty two”. So you see, still unintelligible to the listener.

I started to look on the net for a way around this problem. Nothing jumped out at me as a solution that worked. I then came up with the following idea:

0<span>7000</span> 1<span>2</span>1 0<span>2</span>2

In VoiceOver this reads “zero, seven thousand, one, two, one zero, two, two”. Notice I kept the ‘7000′ as one number; to me “seven thousand” is more memorable than “seven zero zero zero”. This works with VoiceOver (so I’m assuming it also works with JAWS etc). One good thing about this solution is that, when spoken, it splits up the numbers without affecting the spacing for the visual user (it still looks like ‘07000 121 022′). Also, only the spoken style is affected (even though I recognise it’s using otherwise unnecessary spans). If the number is copied and pasted, the content is not compromised as it doesn’t include any extra spaces.

Rik suggested I try aural CSS (media type ’speech’). My research into aural CSS properties found that the property I’d need is already there - ’speak-numeral: digits;’ - and given that I use microformats wherever possible, I could simply reference a ’speech’ CSS file and attach this property to all tags that include the ‘.tel’ selector. But from what I’ve found, there doesn’t seem to be much support for aural CSS in the current crop of browsers.

Request for comments

I’ve written a test page that includes each of the formatted versions of the number.

I know JAWS has already produced this kind of functionality, but is this technique useful for other screen readers (and users on older versions of JAWS)? What about the new version of VoiceOver, has that changed its handling of such content? Has anyone got a screen reader that they could use to test this and critique the idea? Overall is the span method a valid or worthwhile technique? Is there any method available that’s more elegant?