Web Standards Are For Corporations Too
Posted by Tom on November 15th, 2005I like web standards. But I think there are many standards proponents whose advocacy misses the mark when it comes to business.
Being able to easily replicate presentational effects across multiple browsers, from IE or Firefox, to a PDA or cell phone is a web developer’s Utopia. The ability to use semantic markup to not only accommodate users with disabilities and effect clean design, but also to reduce the weight of code and improve response times is a wonderful thing.
Molly Holzschlag has posted a scathing open letter to Disney Store UK, taking them to task for their new design, which is, from an HTML standpoint, a step backward, making some rookie mistakes like bad alt text for images. (I don’t know how it compares visually—I didn’t see the original site.) Like standards advocates frequently do, she cites total cost of ownership, server performance, and search engine rankings.
She’s right on some points: table-based layout and in-page scripts will result in slower downloads and slower renders. Even sub-second delays, while not consciously identifiable, contribute to a reduced level of trust. But Molly, and most of the comments, miss the point from the company’s point of view: does the new site make more money? It’s not until well over 100 comments that Adam brings this up. (Gee, it’d be nice to have that many people react to my blog.) Revenue, not web standards, is the primary driver for corporations.
As for the accessibility issues she brings up, she’s spot on. I think if she had made accessibility the main thrust of her letter rather than just another item in a over-long list of talking points it would have had more impact. But the fault isn’t really with Disney, but with the designer. As I’ve mentioned before, few managers have the skill set to evaluate the work of web programmers on anything other than a visual level. Who is training the managers?
The blogosphere has been accused of being an echo chamber, or as David Weinberger puts it, “Those Internet spaces where like-minded people listen only to those people who already agree with them.” The Web Standards community is no exception. The sole voice who suggested that an open letter criticizing the new Disney site may not have been the most effective course of action was attacked by multiple readers. There is merit in his position, and I was frustrated so many dismissed him out of hand.
Web standards are good. Designers who employ web standards are good. Evangelism does not need to include condescension or criticism. Until corporations with a major internet presence discover for themselves the benefits of web standards on the bottom line, they will not willingly change. Trying to push it on them won’t speed the process. Molly gets it right in her follow-up post (before burying the thought with more indignation): “Professionalism means taking responsibility for educating ourselves and each other.” And education happens best when the learner is excited about learning.
Hi there,
As you may well have guessed by the name, I’m the Adam from the Molly-blog.
Forgive me for creating an “echo chamber”, but having read your comments, I’d have to say it’s nice to see someone that can look at it from both sides of the fence.
It’s also good to see that, if progress is to be made, the level of elitism that exists among the so-called “forward thinkers” in web standards needs to change too.
Very well-written blog post, and although it wasn’t exactly the most normal of circumstances, a pleasure to make your acquaintance.
Left by Adam on November 15th, 2005