It’s good to see that my website does handle IE7 fine.  Aside from that, I should post a bit of an update.  In the past two months, I got a new job and moved up to Boston.  i will be strating everything back up again soon, in case you are still waiting patiently.  (If so, thanks)

In my new job, I am blessed (HA) with a Windows development box.  This has been awhile for me.  I thinks that it has been five years since I have done web development on a Windows machine.  The world has changed a bit since I left; I’m just trying to figure out how.

For development, I have been working with Dreamweaver (pretty much the same as five years ago, except that I now strictly use code view).  Photoshop is the same throughout. 

In a month, I have lost at least two days of total time to Windows Update and AV updates.  The OS is still slow and feels cludgy (more so than Linux even).  I come home at night and enjoy simple acts of checking mail and surfing the web on the Mac.

Being on the OS does allow me to try out some of the new toys (reviews of which are forth coming).  I am actually writing this on Windows Live Writer and it actually seems to be fairly intuitive.  Here’s to a brave new world.

Wow, what an exciting entry I’m writing for you guys today. That’s right; I’ve switched my text editor. I know that some people out there are what I like to call “text sluts,” but I’ve been fairly true to my BBEdit. It has been my standard for years, even with its blemishes.

The difficulty in getting line numbers has constantly made debugging painful, and don’t even get me started on the lack of tabs. I could write an entire entry on how every application needs tabs, but I digress.

Regardless for those complaints, every time I’ve tried a new application, I find myself missing BBEdit. Maybe it comes from my old Emacs days, a desire to cause myself pain, or just fear of change, but nothing has been able to tear me away. Until now.

Smultron has quickly eased any fears I have had from moving away from BBEdit. I couldn’t have found a text editor that just “feels” right any more. If you are a Mac web developer, download it and give it a shot. It’s open source, but only works on Mac OS 10.4.5 or later. If you can run it, you will love it.

First, there was the browser, and it was good. Then the browser got old, and something more was needed. People came up with a way to create easily, and it was good. Now, many create, yet not many navigate. Web 2.0 has difficulties scaling.

The concept of a portal page is very Web 1.0. A portal points (for the most part) to content that someone else has deemed important. At best, you have given the portal a list of things you like and dislike, and the portal tailors the options based on that. It’s not enough.

The portal personalization solution currently used focuses on metadata. It simplifies what you, the reader, wants down to a simple list. A list that you (generally) actively create. This same option is used in more Web 2.0 applications as well. When you read this, you will notice that I have placed this article in a collection of categories (or tags). I have assigned metadata to this entry for the simple fact that this metadata enables others to more easily reach my data.

I could wax on about metadata for quite some time, but the point has been made. People use it constantly, but they have to make it. Why? If I am writing a blog entry, why should I need to provide an “abstract” of what content exists in the entry? Because, the ways that people find my site are directly based upon that metadata. We live in a metadata age.

Metadata isn’t going anywhere for quite some time. I’m going to be so bold as to say that until metadata isn’t the primary way that people find and use content on the internet, it will still be the age of Web 2.0, regardless of what the actual label used is.

Web 3.0 is going to be immersive, not immersive like a 3-D environment is (that would be, at least at this point, unusable), but like a good conversation witha friend is. Web 3.0 will have the conversations of Web 2.0, but it will approach these conversations differently. Web 3.0 will be focused on data.

The actual content of this entry is important, otherwise I would simply have an entry that said, “I am currently thinking about Web 3.0, data, and metadata.” The comments would be metadata too. So, instead of “You are an idiot,” we would get “personal_comment.” What I am describing is unfair; labeling systems have been around almost as long as the written word. They aren’t going anywhere.

What I am saying is that the metadata should be almost invisible. An outside source should look at this entry (and not realize that it is barely coherent drivel) and determine what the article is about. It should see a reader that spends an inordinate amount of time looking at “big picture” discussions of metadata and data and recommend that the reader look at this entry. The reader shouldn’t have to say tthat he or she has an interest in metadata vs. data.

I suspect that something along the lines of what I am suggesting would not be a web application itself, but a modification of the browser. The browser should “learn” what a user likes (although it must have an “ignore this site” option somewhere) and present other sites that the user would find interesting without any intervention.

One web site ha sthe groundwork fairly done for the true “data” system, Google. If they were ever to come out with a Google Browse (and if they use that name, I want money or a job), I would expect it to work much like I’ve described.

Alright, so we already have a design that I’ve said that I liked. Why ae we back here with yet another design? The answer is simple: I still don’t have enough to do with my life. Aside from that, I have found Mr. Martin Belam’s most recent entry on the reboot blog inspiring in some sense.

One of the areas that comp 3 was lacking in was search (it was also browse, but we will get to that later). I had the standard search bar, but I removed one of the few items that followed the whole “wisdom of crowds” theory in the current design of the site. Today, it makes a triumphant return.

You will notice a blue bar under the news breakout I designed. Within this bar is a split up search box that has everything the current search has. You will also notice the A-Z index added under browse. This is the inspiration I was speaking of.

By including the A-Z widget right there with search, I was able to remove the old blue sidebar. With that content gone, I changed the “My BBC” panel to a three-column layout. This enhances the usefulness of the homepage as a portal.

Functionality-wise, only a small handful of changes have been made. Most of these are designed to improve usability within the system. First, the personalized greeting and login options have been moved down to the MyBBC panel. Even with the news breakout being modifiable, the most cutom content will be within the My BBC panel. Therefore, the user will see a logical connection between the two.

Next to the greeting, there is a “change this” link. In the third mock up, this link was in most of the individual widgets. Now, it will point to a specific page that will act as the customization engine. As my design relies on this link, my next mock up will be of that page.

On a more personal note, my underemployment does seem to be drawing to a close, and I will probably be forced to enter just the image mockups of both this page and the “change this” page. I don’t expect this to be a problem, but I do wish I could have had the time to actually create the XHTML shell of the site.

Maybe next time…

And now for the second part in our series “Doesn’t Bill Have Anything Better To Do?”

Without further ado, I present to you comp #2:

With this style, I moved away from the wonderful rounded corners that have given me such warm and fuzzy feelings with the first comp. Of note, I did decide on keeping the “From Us / From You” labeling. The more I searched my soul, the more I realized it was appropriate for the goal.

This design also takes the “Where I Live” from the current site and turns it into “My BBC.” Also in this area is a social bookmarking system.

By reincorporating the advert, more flexibility is given to the design. I chose to elevate the TV and Radio fields due simply to their relation to the banner. This design would change those items depending on what is in the banner space.

By moving the sidebar into the middle (sort of negates the label, huh?), I am using it as a definitive design element. It manages to serve multiple services while maintaining my goal resolution of 800×600.

I like this design worlds better than my first comp, thus making the baseline from now on. In fact, the next may be the final comp, just a slightly tweak version of this.

Let me know what you think.

Due in no small part to my underemployment and current unhappiness with the direction my design skills are going, I have decided to attempt an entry in reboot:bbc.co.uk. To that end, I have put together a rough comp that I may or may not base later designs on. Under most normal situations, I would not publish these (in my opinion) incomplete and untested designs, but I want you, my reader, to see how at least one web designer goes from concept to design.

First off, the wonderful team at the BBC has put together a few guidelines as to what cannot be left out. These are as follows:

• BBC Logo / Branding
• Legal Blurb Links
• Search Box
• The News
• Contact the BBC Link

I will admit that when I had first put this design together, the legal blurb links didn’t make the cut. Let that be a lesson to any in a contest: read the rules first.

So without further ado, here is a thumbnail of my first stab at the design.

From here, you can see a page that is much simpler than the current site. Also, notice the wonderful (over?)use of rounded boxes. I call the overall design retro-circa-2004-blue. I think it has legs.

Anyway, the most important feature of this design is the top rounded box. I’m not thrilled with the wording, but I do like how both BBC content and user content (via blogs, podcasts, and vlogs) share relatively equal footing.

Well, that’s a decent rundown of my first comp. Barring a major distraction, there should be a number of more pieces in this series.

I am a web designer.  Well, not really.  I’m more of a web developer with the ability to put together moderately (according to others) attractive websites.  I like simplicity and focused.  I like readable.  I like content.

I am working as a web designer, according to my job description.  The position is more of a developer position, which is fine.  I am not redesigning web pages.  I have accepted this fact.  I do get to make changes to content, so maybe the job is more data entry.  This is also fine, not preferable, but acceptable. I make minor changes to any number of minor pages. If my job was simply this, I would merely have an issue with being bored. I don’t.

Once upon a time, I worked with a certain program.  This work was not primarily involved with the program, nor was the end result used.  I did use the program.  In my defense, the web was still in its difficult teenage years: drinking off of window frames, putting tables within tables, or any other idea that would make even Escher cringe. I used it, but I didn’t inhale. I swear.

The web is now a young adult. It still drinks from time to time, but usually on tables. Most people don’t even remember the frames incidents.  It uses big words like semantics and compliance. It gave up on the excesses of youth. I have to work to find a site that hasn’t graduated from HTML to XHTML. CSS is passe. Developers focus more on issues like RSS or AJAX, not on indiscretions so prevalent in previous ages.

Yet the drug remains. Usually it can be found on media sites: movies, bands, and high school web pages. Finding a user is easy. Simply look for the "skip intro" link below the garish visuals and garish sounds. Like many drugs, this one has activists who push it, often literally. The tell us to just give it a try. Just one hit, and we will know that it will be OK.

These last few days have included me being force fed that hit.

Having tried the drug allow me to tell you, my wary reader, some interesting facts. The plethora of changes in the last six years have not changed the poor feeling one gets from using it. Smokers cough the first time. This drug isn’t quite as obvious. You feel a sense of apathy and disgust deep down. Listen to it.

All joking aside, I will make a harsh generalization. The situation requires it.

This drug assures a poorly designed site. It is never done for the web site visitor, but both for the Flash designer and the client. The desire for something edgy and impressive neglects the user. That’s right. It neglects the user.

The user, and I know this because I am one, wants information. We want to know if your company will help us make sense of our lives. Why should I buy your product, use your services, or talk to a representative? Unless your services consist of overwhelming my viewpoint on your site, please let me get through to your site. Especially if you are a business. Would you buy a car from a salesman wearing a pink polka dot mu mu? Probably not. Why dress your web site in one?