In a recent post I used a video to demonstrate How people access the Web. It profiled one user but my intention was to encourage people to think outside the box and not assume every person has common abilities. When designing a Web site the only thing you can take for granted (for now) is that every end user is human, period.

I’m not going to sit here, preach and list various disabilities. Instead, I’ll continue to post more videos to continue to demonstrate how people access the Web. For all you know, one of your Web sites is someone else’s favourite.

While picking my daughter up from school today the parents were told the school is setting up a Web site. Obviously this trigged an interest from me, I asked if it would be accessible.

One mother looked and me and asked what I meant, so to dumb it down and sum it up quickly I said “If a Web site is built correctly, anyone should be able to access the information upon it, including blind people”. Her jaw dropped. I didn’t want to single out blind people, but I knew she understood.

Give a man a fish and he will eat for one day.
Teach a man to fish and he will eat for life

Its not as simple as give a blind person a screen reader and they can access all information on the Web. The software is designed to work best with complaint Web sites, so for all the little pains you might feel having to use the correct mark up and structure if you stop and think about it, those little efforts are seriously improving someone else’s virtual experience, which in some case can be better than real life.

You could be forgiven if your initial answer to that question is Dialup, Broadband or Mobile. For most, its a case of simply “turn it on”, but for others its more that than.

I’ve heard people say “the Web is my lively-hood”. But, for some, reliance on the Web is much more than that. Some people believe accessibility is about giving Deaf/Blind people access to information on their Web site.

In the video below you’ll get a better understanding for how some use the Web. You’ll see a woman who runs the house hold, ordering groceries, managing the bank balance, paying all the bills and in her spare time, helping her hubby. She also finds the time to keep in touch with friends. She plays a pivot role in the house hold.

Marie has Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) a.k.a Motor Neurone Disease (MND) and credits the computer for saving her life. Marie uses SwitchXS to access her computer, KeyStrokes for word prediction and Proloquo for communication.

This is just one of many examples of how some people access the Web, more to come.

Marie uses SwitchXS to access her computer, KeyStrokes for word prediction and Proloquo for communication.

In a recent post about a Peters Pink Boat I came across a Web site which has to be the most inaccessible Web site I have ever seen.

“Bloom in the Park is the largest and most spectacular gardening event in Ireland, hosted by Bord Bia. Its a competition of sorts where gardeners can get creative as they like.”

The Bloom in the Park Web site should get a Golden Razzie. The site is one big image thats probably been run through a Dreamweaver chopping shop. Everything is an image right down to the text.

The competition is all about “getting creative” and obviously the organisers like things that look nice. (Note to organisers not everyone who uses the Web can see.)

I’ve seen a lot of bad sites and most could be put down to lack of knowledge and experience. In such cases the developers usually demonstrate that they did their home work and with a little research they did their best to make their Web site as accessible as they new best.

Chances are the developer marked up headings incorrectly, hard coded a few spacer gifs and forgot to provide alt text for images, but they gave it their best shot. With a little encouragement these developers can only get better and they do.

Part of the problem with accessibility is understanding, some people just cant think outside the box while others are not paid to think outside of the box. I’d love to know what their excuse is. It was the same last year.

This Web site clearly demonstrates the wool being pulled over the clients eyes, but is that good enough excuse, surely in this day and age they could manage to pull of a Single A compliant Web site?

The third iteration of every browser builders best friend / worst enemy has just been released by those diabolical nerds over at the Web Standards Project. For those not familar with it the Acid3 Test is a very clever Web application utilizing the most current web standards in such a way that only a browser which has implemented the standards correctly will display the page correctly. So far none of the current browsers come close to passing. Results for all your favourite browsers can be seen here.

I picked up a post about search on GIGAOM, which helps me to demonstrate why I think Content Labels is the way forward, to help enable Trust in search results. I have lifted some of the post published on GIAGAOM and included their opinion at the bottom as a separate quote.

Google’s dominance in online search hasn’t stopped hundreds of startups from trying to build a better mousetrap. Each is trying a new twist on search: geography, crowdsourcing, tags, user annotations, learned hierarchies and timelines. With $20 billion spent on online advertising every year, a killer search application can make a lot of money.

But will new types of search catch on? A recent study of the Google Generation, conducted by University College London, found that “users make very little use of advanced search facilities, assuming that search engines ‘understand’ their queries.” Many of today’s Internet users still don’t know how to use a search engine, preferring instead to type a domain name into the search box (which is why Yahoo is a top search on Google and vice-versa.) The reverse, known as type-in traffic, involves typing a search topic into the address bar to find results.

Alistair Croll’s opinion

If the flurry of search startups can tie into the social graph of Google, Facebook and others without biting the hands that feed them, then they have a chance of succeeding. But if they’re betting their business on changing the way people search, they have a lot of work ahead of them.

I totally agree with Alistair. We don’t need more search engines. What we need is for the current search engines to do all they can to enable more relevance and trust. Battling against Google is mad to say the least. This is why Segala has been working on Content Labels for the past two and a half years. This blog is attracting new readers all the time so I won’t assume you know what I’m talking about. So, I’ve published below, an old post which explains what Content Labels are, how they work and importantly, why I think they will see mass adoption within the next 24 months.

How to enable current search engines provide more trust

Before I explain how Content Labels enable more reliable and relevant search results, I will first use an analogy to help explain in plain English, what a Content Label is. This will help you to visualise yourself making use of a label, whether you are an end user, developer, Web site owner, search provider, browser vendor or trustmark provider.

Think of Content Labels on the back of food packaging

Jackie goes to the supermarket to buy the weekly shopping. Amongst other things, her shopping list includes a tin of baked beans. Most of the time, Jackie is happy to buy Heinz without hesitation.

Adrian goes to the supermarket with a similar shopping list. He however, has dietary requirements to consider. Adrian likes to check the Content Label on the back of the beans tin (irrespective of how much he trusts the brand) to ensure he’s happy with the contents before making a purchase.

Joanna is pregnant and although she should be taking it easy, decides to do the weekly shopping. She’s aware that eating any form of cream cheese is dangerous for the unborn. To ensure she doesn’t endanger her baby’s health, she checks the Content Labels on items that may contain cream cheese before making her purchasing decisions.

The moral of the story

People have different needs, some will only buy products that are low in fat, low in calories, high in protein or have some other dietary consideration.

Some brands will do more than provide a Content Label to promote the contents of their products. Brands such as Weight Watchers, for example, will promote specific aspects of their labels as a unique selling point to differentiate them from competitors. This allows buyers to look specifically for Weight Watchers without searching for any other brand to make a purchase, even though other brands may be trusted. Other brands are simply not ‘relevant’ (at this time).

So, there are numerous reasons why people check the Content Label on food packaging. The main point to highlight is that we are all different, with different needs and preferences when searching for and buying products.

If it wasn’t for the Content Labels on the back of food packaging, we would end up having to search and buy lots of products in order to taste and discover the ones that meet our dietary requirements. Some people may even die if they eat something they’re allergic to (such a nuts) - this may seem like an exaggeration, but the analogy does apply to the Web - consider a user who buys medication online.

If you’re the type of person that doesn’t care to read Content Labels on packaging, at least keep in mind that a lot of people do.

The problem today

The only information search engines provide today is the title and description of each Web site, nothing more. How do you know which Web sites are trustworthy?

A range of trustmark (visual badges) schemes exist around the world. In each case, a Web site is awarded the right to display a seal of approval or trustmark following a review by an independent authority or internal assessor. Trustmarks normally hyperlink to a certificate page provided by the labeling scheme provider to authenticate its claims.

However, trustmarks are invisible to search engines which limit their value. A user must already be on a Web site before they know it meets a labeling provider’s claims. Moreover, the logo is often displayed on just a single page and therefore invisible to visitors who are viewing other pages on the site.

The solution

Taking the food analogy to the Web, wouldn’t it be beneficial if Web site owners could provide more information about their content before users hit their site? In other words, allowing users to read specific information about the suitability of their content from search results. Well, this is now possible using Web Content Labels.

• It’s now possible for site owners to provide more information about their content from search results.
• It’s now possible for search engines to provide more reliable and relevant search results.
• It’s now possible for users to read Content Labels and make informed decisions about the suitability of content before entering Web sites.

Content Labels are files used to classify content in the form of metadata. The information contained within a Content Label is not generally found on the Web site, unless it’s in the form or a Trustmark. Content Labels not only contain information about the content, they also contain information such as the company name, asserter, creation date and expiration date.

The type of information contained in a Content Label very much depends on what the site owner wants to make claims about. It’s important to note that Content Labels have a very specific use. They’re used to make assertions about conformance to industry standards and codes of conduct. They’re not used to make assertions that are ambiguous. Although it’s debatable that most standards and codes of conduct are open to interpretation.

In concept, Content Labels act in a similar fashion to SSL Certificates. SSL Certificates are used so browsers can tell if a site is secure for credit card transactions. However, Content Labels are much more flexible. They can be used to make claims about a specific URI without the restriction of having to make a claim about an entire domain.

Content Labels are a lower cost solution than SSL Certificates as sold by companies such as VeriSign and GeoTrust. Oh wait, VeriSign bought GeoTrust which was their biggest competitor, so that provides them with a monopoly using proprietary technology. This is something we intend to disrupt!

We’re also helping to build other elements of the ecosystem. We have instigation the creation of ContentLabel.org. Contentlabel.org facilitates the creation and harmonization of new codes of conduct for which Segala will create new Content Labels. The idea is for any organisation or association worldwide to create a code of conduct and then have it reviewed in an open forum, formalised, endorsed and promoted.

It’s also possible for organisations and associations that already have a code of conduct (even if they have a trustmark) to have it recognised by industry and promoted to encourage mass adoption.

We intend to start with a new code of conduct for blogs as it appears to go down well with the bloggers we’ve spoken to. Anyone can participate so get in touch if you would like to get involved.

I stated recently that I wasn’t go to Chair or speak at conferences this year as I had my fill of them last year. I’ve already had to decline 2 kind offers to Chair very good conferences. So I’m being very picky about the events I attend this year. If I’m to Chair or speak, it must be directly related to Segala’s business, be beneficial to the community (i.e. it’s no more than £40 to attend and not the typical £750+), or be in a sunny location Don’t get me wrong, I love to be asked. I just don’t have the time these days.

The Irish Web Technology Conference is my first speaking slot of the year.

What I’m going to talk about

I’m going to deliver a presentation on how Content Labels (AKA POWDER) will enable more trust on the Web. I’ll have with me, a tin of Heinze Baked Beans to help me demonstrate how Content Labels help consumers make better informed decisions about the suitability of products before making a purchase.

Sound interesting? Well, why not come along. As with every conference, you’re likely to get most value by hanging out in the hallway chatting to others and with around 500 delegates expected, you’re likely to meet some very interesting people. I might give away a prize as a means of keeping everyone awake. I’ve done this before and it seems to work well.

Oh by the way, all of this Content Labels malarkey is based on the Semantic Web. Don’t tell anyone though as they might assume it’s academic, boring or a nice concept.

About the conference

WHY?

This event’s aim is to showcase the sheer brilliance of the Irish Web Industry. It’s a four day, 10 track, 50 session web extravaganza.

WHAT?

The inaugural IWTC 2008 organised by IrishDev.com in association with the Dublin Java User Group and First Port Jobs, is the first of seven major technology conference in our Series 2008.

IWTC 2008 is an event by the Irish Java community for the Irish Java community and will bring many experts and internationally renowned speakers together to discuss latest trends and emerging technologies.

With almost 50 expert technology sessions to choose from, covering a breadth of Web technologies, this is yet another tech conference you can’t afford to miss!

When?

Begins Tuesday 26th February, Ends Friday 29th.

Where?

Cineworld Complex Parnell Street, Dublin 1

As you know, we ran a competition to find a new name for our Firefox extension. Aido and I went through the names and couldn’t find one we liked. So we thought…

As a way of thanking everyone for their contribution, I decided to give away the iPod anyway. So, tonight I pasted everyone’s name into a word document and assigned a number to each one. I then asked my Twitter friends to suggest a number so I could choose the winner. I’m extremely lucky because Pat Phelan picked Mike Butcher’s number.

That’s the good news for Mike. The lucky news for me is that one of Mike’s suggestions was powdrr.com Given that Aido and I came up with POWDR, I think Mike should have won anyway.

Talk about being lucky! And I’m referring to me being lucky, not Mike. Reading back on this post, I’m wondering if we should go with powdrr instead of POWDR. Argh!

Weird huh?