The Web is a Human Creation : Comments
September 29, 2004
Comments
Michael – thank you for the thoughtful article. I really enjoyed reading it.
About critical thinking: I’ve found that guidelines serve to benefit those who don’t/won’t/can’t do critical thinking on their own for the topic in question. In most cases, though, it’s not because they are lazy: it’s because they have other things like children, mortgages, deadlines, and social relationships to think critically about.
For correctness, all guidelines/best practices/rules should come with a giant disclaimer that says “Created in a different context: use carefully”. However, that would presume that we had the time to think critically about how to apply them to our context. So it’s a conundrum: those who are in greatest need of guidelines are the ones who have the least time to consider them thoughtfully.
To be overly-general, this leaves two camps: designers who blindly follow guidelines, and designers who have thought critically enough to know that most guidelines don’t serve their specific needs.
Thanks for your thoughful insight.
I agree with your basic message, if I am interpreting this correctly. It is an elite and small number of Web developers/designers who get to even have a say in, let alone a make a decision about most of the aspects involved in our real world” jobs.
However, regardless of whether you have a say in a particular decision, we all still need to know and learn certain things in order to do our jobs, and even the basics seem diffult in our field without the use of crital thought.
Example: I have to learn what a “type face” or “font” is if I am going to be a graphic designer, regardless of anyone’s opinion of preferences to certain typographic styles. Imagine if there wasn’t even a consensus or definition of “type face?”
I agree completely. In learning about a typeface, for example, we learn under what conditions we might consider a typeface, or more specifically what jobs certain typefaces are better at handling. For example: comic sans is well suited to more playful contexts.
Most guidelines, on the other hand, leave us with rigid rules for design. That may not have been the original intention, but from my experience that’s what many people use them for. Other designers, used to solving problems on their own, cry foul. They see guidelines as stifling creativity and encouraging sameness. That is a popular criticism of the usability field in general and usability guidelines in particular.
Learning guidelines, I think, is not the learning you’re talking about, and probably not what we should be shooting for.
I thought this was a really great idea that sort of fizzled as the article wore on. It felt like it lost focus. I don’t think the gratuitous use of subheadings helped. I’d like to see this thought developed and focused more, but a nice offering nonetheless. A pleasant change of pace from all of the business-focused articles on this site.
If only the a-listers in question would read this article and take it to heart. I think the time is ripe for the Web Standards crowd to realize that to some degree they are in the social change business, and there is more to that than “the ROI of adhering to Web Standards.” From what I can tell (and admittedly I know nothing about “Social Marketing”), the social marketing theorists have been working to understand this stuff for a long time, and have a lot to offer people working for change.
Great article Michael.
Peter, you it the nail on the head. Anyone involved in Social change efforts understands this: we need to influence and change human behaviors. This is a very difficult task, especially when dealing with a complex issue (this isn’t about convincing people to pick one brand of soft drink over another).
This is very different than what we are do in our profession, whether it is on the development side or the design side. This is about “technology” and innovatetion and all sort of excepting ideas and concepts. It also happens to be about social change; specifically, the way we (people) connect, communicate, network, and there in lies the problem. Very insightful comment Peter.
Your article is a delight! I found myself making notes as I read: “wise, clever, visiONARY, pragmatic, witty, well written…just enough over my head to be fun….by the end I didn’t want it to end…lively, insightful….”
You’re a social scientist and an artist. I look forward to more!
Thank you
You can use this
feed to keep up with the comments made on this article.