Is there a public, free web service that generates tag clouds? I'm looking for something like Google Chart--URL in, image out.
I highly doubt it. A web service for this wouldn't make any sense.
There are tons of libraries though:
CodeIgniter: http://codeigniter.com/forums/viewthread/64498/
Java: http://opencloud.sourceforge.net/
It still makes sense to me, but I haven't been able to find any such service. Actually, the API could be words in, styled text out or words in, image out. I'll just implement what I need in SWT and go from there.
You can see an example of the kind of thing I'd like to generate at http://www.wordle.net/gallery/wrdl/359579/JUnit_Tests. These are the words in the names of JUnit's self-tests.
12 years later, I decided to build this World Cloud API. You send it your text, it will render a PNG or SVG word cloud with word tokens scaled by frequency.
Here's a simple URL example using a famous speech:
https://quickchart.io/wordcloud?text=Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Note that GET requests typically require that you URL encode the text, especially if it contains special characters.
There are many parameters that allow you to customize and scale your word cloud. Some notable ones include:
text: The actual text to create a tag cloud from (required)
scale: The function to determine how words are scaled by frequency. linear (default), sqrt, or log.
removeStopWords: Set to true to remove common English words
fontScale: A multiplier that determines the baseline size of words
For larger texts, you should use a POST request instead of encoding it in the URL. Here's an example usage in Python:
resp = requests.post('https://quickchart.io/wordcloud', json={
'format': 'png',
'width': 1000,
'height': 1000,
'fontScale': 15,
'scale': 'linear',
'removeStopwords': True,
'minWordLength': 4,
'text': 'To be or not to be, that is the question...',
})
with open('shakespeare.png', 'wb') as f:
f.write(resp.content)
I documented all the API options and multiple word cloud examples here.
Hope someone finds this useful!
Maybe you could make a use of this : http://www.wordle.net/
Realize that this is an old post, but I think tagcrowd.com might work here despite no API access. Commercial license is cheap $19.95.
Related
I'm excited about the rel="preload" property, because it looks like it can help speed up page render times.
The use case is a web page with a large image above the fold. Right now, Chrome doesn't start downloading the image until after fetching jQuery (a fairly heavy file). With preloading enabled, they download in parallel.
But I'm reading conflicting reports about whether I should use preload for things that are in visible HTML elements elsewhere (as opposed to things made visible by user interaction, like a dropdown menu).
This post seems to recommend not preloading:
When not to use preloading:
When the asset is referred to somewhere else on the same page.
When you're not sure the user will actually require that asset. Like on a page visitors only go to 3% of the time.
While this one seems to indicate it was really helpful for a similar situation on the Financial Times website:
When the Financial Times introduced a Link preload header to their site, they shaved 1 second off the time it took to display the masthead image...
So which is it? Should I provide an early "hint" to display the always-shown, above-the-fold image? Or should I just let the browser get to it in the usual order?
I think that in cases involving performance optimization, you really want to create an A/B test to determine which one you should do. There really is no cookie cutter answer for image preloading that applies to everybody as a best practice.
One of the biggest tenets of a favorite book of mine, Lean Enterprise, is use to A/B tests to prove or disprove a HIPPO (highly paid person's opinion). Certain opinions carry a lot of weight, both in your organization and on the internet. Because of their importance and reputation, their opinions veer towards the realm of fact, even though it may not be.
The practice of measuring performance empirically is also touted by another book I love which deals with performance tuning - Code Complete 2nd Ed. In that book, McConnell gives several code examples where you would expect one piece of code to be optimal, but in fact, it performed poorly (see chapters 25 and 26). One of his key points is that you should always test a performance optimization. If it isn't worth testing, it isn't worth writing the "highly performant" code in the first place. McConnell's premise doesn't just apply to his low level coding examples, but to high level decisions such as preloading images above the fold as well.
I can also attest to the importance of A/B testing at a professional level. I used to work on Amazon's SEO team and we A/B tested everything. The fact of the matter is that you never really know how customers will respond to something. Nobody can predict customer behavior - not even Jeff Bezos - and you really need to back up your hypothesis with real data to prove or disprove the validity of what you're doing.
Even though you can find multiple blog articles and online sources discussing whether preloading is better or not, you don't really know whether that will work for you until you've done it. Different people have different servers with different performance characteristics and different network topologies, etc. You just don't know which way is better for you until you have the data. If you launch your A/B test and find that find that your repel rate goes up when preloading, then you know that you have to dial back your treatment and return to your control. If however, you find that customers don't get bored waiting and click through at a higher rate than before, then you have a winner and you dial up the treatment - deleting the control code entirely after a period.
I hope that helps.
The article is wrong about those statements. Preloading is used by the developer because he already knows those assets are needed on a page. Preloading is not a "hint". Prefetching is more in line with what he states, that you are telling a browser that it's possible the asset may be needed.
If an image is above the fold, then you know it will be needed, and that is exactly what prefetching is for.
Addy Osmani of Google
preload is a declarative fetch, allowing you to force the browser to
make a request for a resource without blocking the document’s onload
event.
I would use rel="preload" for images only if they are to be found in css, javascript that will led to a bottleneck in the render of the page at a later time, if user driven events will request the image and it will have detrimental impact in user experience or if you are experiencing any flows due to this large image in the rendering of the page.
I understand your image is above the fold, and if it's to be found in the source code from the beginning I would let browser prioritize what to download first.
On the other hand you could always A/B this change and see if it works for you.
There's a lot of scholarly work on HTML content extraction, e.g., Gupta & Kaiser (2005) Extracting Content from Accessible Web Pages, and some signs of interest here, e.g., one, two, and three, but I'm not really clear about how well the practice of the latter reflects the ideas of the former. What is the best practice?
Pointers to good (in particular, open source) implementations and good scholarly surveys of implementations would be the kind of thing I'm looking for.
Postscript the first: To be precise, the kind of survey I'm after would be a paper (published, unpublished, whatever) that discusses both criteria from the scholarly literature, and a number of existing implementations, and analyses how unsuccessful the implementations are from the viewpoint of the criteria. And, really, a post to a mailing list would work for me too.
Postscript the second To be clear, after Peter Rowell's answer, which I have accepted, we can see that this question leads to two subquestions: (i) the solved problem of cleaning up non-conformant HTML, for which Beautiful Soup is the most recommended solution, and (ii) the unsolved problem or separating cruft (mostly site-added boilerplate and promotional material) from meat (the contentthat the kind of people who think the page might be interesting in fact find relevant. To address the state of the art, new answers need to address the cruft-from-meat peoblem explicitly.
Extraction can mean different things to different people. It's one thing to be able to deal with all of the mangled HTML out there, and Beautiful Soup is a clear winner in this department. But BS won't tell you what is cruft and what is meat.
Things look different (and ugly) when considering content extraction from the point of view of a computational linguist. When analyzing a page I'm interested only in the specific content of the page, minus all of the navigation/advertising/etc. cruft. And you can't begin to do the interesting stuff -- co-occurence analysis, phrase discovery, weighted attribute vector generation, etc. -- until you have gotten rid of the cruft.
The first paper referenced by the OP indicates that this was what they were trying to achieve -- analyze a site, determine the overall structure, then subtract that out and Voila! you have just the meat -- but they found it was harder than they thought. They were approaching the problem from an improved accessibility angle, whereas I was an early search egine guy, but we both came to the same conclusion:
Separating cruft from meat is hard. And (to read between the lines of your question) even once the cruft is removed, without carefully applied semantic markup it is extremely difficult to determine 'author intent' of the article. Getting the meat out of a site like citeseer (cleanly & predictably laid out with a very high Signal-to-Noise Ratio) is 2 or 3 orders of magnitude easier than dealing with random web content.
BTW, if you're dealing with longer documents you might be particularly interested in work done by Marti Hearst (now a prof at UC Berkely). Her PhD thesis and other papers on doing subtopic discovery in large documents gave me a lot of insight into doing something similar in smaller documents (which, surprisingly, can be more difficult to deal with). But you can only do this after you get rid of the cruft.
For the few who might be interested, here's some backstory (probably Off Topic, but I'm in that kind of mood tonight):
In the 80's and 90's our customers were mostly government agencies whose eyes were bigger than their budgets and whose dreams made Disneyland look drab. They were collecting everything they could get their hands on and then went looking for a silver bullet technology that would somehow ( giant hand wave ) extract the 'meaning' of the document. Right. They found us because we were this weird little company doing "content similarity searching" in 1986. We gave them a couple of demos (real, not faked) which freaked them out.
One of the things we already knew (and it took a long time for them to believe us) was that every collection is different and needs it's own special scanner to deal with those differences. For example, if all you're doing is munching straight newspaper stories, life is pretty easy. The headline mostly tells you something interesting, and the story is written in pyramid style - the first paragraph or two has the meat of who/what/where/when, and then following paras expand on that. Like I said, this is the easy stuff.
How about magazine articles? Oh God, don't get me started! The titles are almost always meaningless and the structure varies from one mag to the next, and even from one section of a mag to the next. Pick up a copy of Wired and a copy of Atlantic Monthly. Look at a major article and try to figure out a meaningful 1 paragraph summary of what the article is about. Now try to describe how a program would accomplish the same thing. Does the same set of rules apply across all articles? Even articles from the same magazine? No, they don't.
Sorry to sound like a curmudgeon on this, but this problem is genuinely hard.
Strangely enough, a big reason for google being as successful as it is (from a search engine perspective) is that they place a lot of weight on the words in and surrounding a link from another site. That link-text represents a sort of mini-summary done by a human of the site/page it's linking to, exactly what you want when you are searching. And it works across nearly all genre/layout styles of information. It's a positively brilliant insight and I wish I had had it myself. But it wouldn't have done my customers any good because there were no links from last night's Moscow TV listings to some random teletype message they had captured, or to some badly OCR'd version of an Egyptian newspaper.
/mini-rant-and-trip-down-memory-lane
One word: boilerpipe.
For the news domain, on a representative corpus, we're now at 98% / 99% extraction accuracy (avg/median)
Demo: http://boilerpipe-web.appspot.com/
Code: http://code.google.com/p/boilerpipe/
Presentation: http://videolectures.net/wsdm2010_kohlschutter_bdu/
Dataset and slides: http://www.l3s.de/~kohlschuetter/boilerplate/
PhD thesis: http://www.kohlschutter.com/pdf/Dissertation-Kohlschuetter.pdf
Also quite language independent (today, I've learned it works for Nepali, too).
Disclaimer: I am the author of this work.
Have you seen boilerpipe? Found it mentioned in a similar question.
I have come across http://www.keyvan.net/2010/08/php-readability/
Last year I ported Arc90′s Readability
to use in the Five Filters project.
It’s been over a year now and
Readability has improved a lot —
thanks to Chris Dary and the rest of
the team at Arc90.
As part of an update to the Full-Text
RSS service I started porting a more
recent version (1.6.2) to PHP and the
code is now online.
For anyone not familiar, Readability
was created for use as a browser addon
(a bookmarklet). With one click it
transforms web pages for easy reading
and strips away clutter. Apple
recently incorporated it into Safari
Reader.
It’s also very handy for content
extraction, which is why I wanted to
port it to PHP in the first place.
there are a few open source tools available that do similar article extraction tasks.
https://github.com/jiminoc/goose which was open source by Gravity.com
It has info on the wiki as well as the source you can view. There are dozens of unit tests that show the text extracted from various articles.
I've worked with Peter Rowell down through the years on a wide variety of information retrieval projects, many of which involved very difficult text extraction from a diversity of markup sources.
Currently I'm focused on knowledge extraction from "firehose" sources such as Google, including their RSS pipes that vacuum up huge amounts of local, regional, national and international news articles. In many cases titles are rich and meaningful, but are only "hooks" used to draw traffic to a Web site where the actual article is a meaningless paragraph. This appears to be a sort of "spam in reverse" designed to boost traffic ratings.
To rank articles even with the simplest metric of article length you have to be able to extract content from the markup. The exotic markup and scripting that dominates Web content these days breaks most open source parsing packages such as Beautiful Soup when applied to large volumes characteristic of Google and similar sources. I've found that 30% or more of mined articles break these packages as a rule of thumb. This has caused us to refocus on developing very low level, intelligent, character based parsers to separate the raw text from the markup and scripting. The more fine grained your parsing (i.e. partitioning of content) the more intelligent (and hand made) your tools must be. To make things even more interesting, you have a moving target as web authoring continues to morph and change with the development of new scripting approaches, markup, and language extensions. This tends to favor service based information delivery as opposed to "shrink wrapped" applications.
Looking back over the years there appears to have been very few scholarly papers written about the low level mechanics (i.e. the "practice of the former" you refer to) of such extraction, probably because it's so domain and content specific.
Beautiful Soup is a robust HTML parser written in Python.
It gracefully handles HTML with bad markup and is also well-engineered as a Python library, supporting generators for iteration and search, dot-notation for child access (e.g., access <foo><bar/></foo>' usingdoc.foo.bar`) and seamless unicode.
If you are out to extract content from pages that heavily utilize javascript, selenium remote control can do the job. It works for more than just testing. The main downside of doing this is that you'll end up using a lot more resources. The upside is you'll get a much more accurate data feed from rich pages/apps.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
Soon I will need to give a presentation on my honours project for the engineering faculty and a large group of engineering and technology students at my university. While all the the people attending will be technical-minded, not all of them will be programmers and most will be from other engineering disciplines.
I have given presentations before, and I am confident speaking to a crowd, but I realize now all the presentations I have given before have been to fellow CS/SE majors and teaching staff. I wonder if my presentation style assumes that I am presenting to other software geeks, so they will know what I am talking about and I can put on a more interactive demo involving the audience.
My honours project isn't terribly complex or theoretical, I have a prototype C# Winforms app but it is designed to be extensible and operate with different data sources (ODBC or WS) in the future, and some research to how it could be extended with a rule engine and DSL and turned into a marketable product. The organization that is testing my prototype is saving tens of thousands of dollars a year by automating a critical business function.
I had planned to show off how extensible it was by some live coding and UML-style diagrams. I really enjoy doing demos and live coding but I don't know if that kind of presentation will be as accessible to non-programmers, and I am worried if I get too geeky and technical I may alienate the audience and judges.
What are the effective techniques you have found to present software projects in a way that is also interesting to non-programmers
When I was working on my doctorate, the faculty gave us this rule for seminars - and it has proved very useful since:
Tell 'em what you're gonna tell 'em. (E.g., brief introductory problem
description and results abstract)
Tell 'em. (E.g. technical details comprising the bulk of the time)
Tell 'em what you told 'em. (E.g. brief summary and conclusions)
Open the floor for questions.
In your position, I would take about 10-20% of your allotted time to do #1 in a largely non-technical way. So you might describe the business function your code automates, why that's important, what things were like before and after applying your solution, how it's saving money, that kind of thing.
Then I'd launch into a highly technical discussion aimed at the CS/SE crowd. Even if the rest of the folks don't understand it and their eyes glaze over, your introduction at least will have given them a sense of what it's all about, and they might recognize a bit here or there.
For the third part, I'd briefly recap the problem and describe how you solved it in non-technical language, and then do your live-coding extensibility whiz-bang demo. Even if the non-CS/SE folks don't understand the demo, they'll see eye candy flying by and your professional peers and faculty all nodding and smiling, so they'll think it's cool.
I once attended a seminar by a guy who won the Nobel Prize for applying chaos theory to chemical systems. He applied this approach, so even though all the non-theoreticians like my fellow organic chemists and I were all completely out of our depth, the fact that the theoreticians were all excited left us feeling like it was a great seminar even though we didn't have a clue about what he'd said.
To appeal to both audiences, I sometimes give the technical explanation and then follow it up with my "in English, please" explanation. CSI and other dramas with science in them do this all the time, to good effect.
In other words, [insert plain english explanation here].
Lets attack this as a refactoring problem.
ie Instead of adding more to your presentation, Is there a way in which you can take stuff out?
For example I don't think showing off that your demo App can use multiple data sources is essential, much less grants for you to program right there during the presentation.
I know it took care in the design of your app to reach that point, but still most people are more interested in the OUTPUTS not the INPUTS of an app. And even more in the BENEFITS of said app.
Some guiding points:
Make the presentation about them. If the audience has felt the pain that your program solves, remind them of that pain. If they are other researches like yourself then ask them to put themselves in the shoes of the organization you helped.
Compare the old way vs the new way of doing things. Why is the new way more efficient? Will it lead to more sales? will it reduce inventory? or save money? Will someone lose his/her job because your solution makes his task irrelevant. Note: When making technological presentations I've observed is important to address what happens to the people that was doing the task previously. Fortunately most of the time people don't lose their jobs, in most cases the same people can manage a much larger volume of work thanks to
Technology.
Show results. What are the real results your demo company has observed?
Use meaningful visuals. If you could make some animations that explain your algorithm even better.
Tell your point at the beginning and the end. Most people will forget what happened in the middle so make sure to tell the most important thing at the beginning and the of your talk.
Practice, Practice. Yeah it sounds ridiculous but do your whole presentation in front of a mirror or video recorded at least twice. The more the better.
Don't give one of the most important presentations of your life without a rehearsal.
Breath and be positive you will do fine :-D
PS: My suggestions are derived from this webpage. It has guided me several times:
6 Stimuli to reach the old brain
You're already working on knowing your audience, which I think is awesome, you just need to take it a step further, and ask yourself, if I were x person in the audience, what would I get out of this presentation.
I'd question the validity and how much effort should go into the technical/coding demo, if the group you're presenting to is never likely to use your specific implementation. It may be more important to portray how you approached the extensibility, so that you garner ideas within the peers on how they can approach it in the future, as well as hit on points throughout that are important to all of your audience members, and maybe shortcut the demo a bit to just show that, yes, indeed it does work.
I don't know about you, but personally I've always got more value out of these types of presentations based around how the project appeals to everyone, how you are managing to save tens of thousands of dollars per year for this company, theoretically why other companies might want to use it as well, what is the market and other factors, what were the giant technological hurtles you had to overcome, even if it's a simple project, there were things you must have thought about ahead of time to avoid and prevent you from getting backed into a corner.
I think if you're a really good presenter, and the purpose of the presentation is to be broad and appealing to the entire group, and not a talk on the chaos theory and application to chemical systems, which has that stated purpose, you should appeal to the lowest common denominator of the audience, and the entire audience can be entertained and appreciate what you have achieved at every step along the way, and to do this, they don't necessarily have to understand every step taken either.
I've been in the same situation
(presenting a software engineering/image processing/recognition project in an EE faculty competition).
Start with the issue (the problem)
Then the background (a BIT of technical background)
The solution:
Start with block-charts (all engineers read those)
Then explain the technologies and how briefly - how complicated the implementation was
(don't underestimate the complicated part - otherwise you may make your work seem to simple to engineers from other fields - they won't appreciate your effort)
Results:
Show short visual examples (try to make them intriguing)
(short code examples can go here)
Short user interface demo
Show impressive graphs
Bibliography, thanks, possible future improvements/research
Questions (if the forum is large, tell them in advance that the time for questions will be at the end)
General advice:
Practice presenting (over and over)
Leave 45-60 seconds per slide
No more than 5 points per slide
1 line per point
Add jokes
No animations except for demonstrating complicated issues faster
Use clear fonts (Ariel or Calibri for regular text, 1 different font for titles)
Use high contrast colors
(bright on black or dark on white if you must - no dark on dark or bright or bright)
Well first of all, I would suggest talking to your faculty advisers about what they expect from your presentation. If there's any question about how you should balance technical details understandable to only CS people versus more general concepts understandable to the larger audience, I think it would really help to get input from those who will be evaluating you.
One thing I really like to see from a presentation is a "take home message". What is the one thing you want everyone in that audience to remember long after they've left the room? Tell them the take-home message at the very beginning. Tell them you will spend the rest of the presentation explaining why they should care and why they should believe you. Even if people get lost in some of the technicalities, if you at least drive home that one message, you've delivered one thing to a lot of people.
Another suggestion: don't forget about format. Presentation slides should be readable from anywhere in the auditorium/lecture hall. Don't overwhelm people with too much text on one slide. Keep bullets short and easy to scan. Do you want people spend their time reading your slides or do you want them to listen to what you have to say? Don't use acronyms, but if you must, explain what they mean--and put the definitions on your slides--unless you are sure they are common knowledge. If people are sitting there wondering what the heck that acronym means, they aren't listening.
As to whether you should show actual code or do live coding, my gut feeling is that you shouldn't unless it's absolutely critical to the point you're making. If your project were actually about some coding construct (e.g., if you had invented the concept of an "extension method"), okay, it would make sense to get into some actual code. But it sounds like the significance of what you've done is definitely up a level from that. You might want to show how little code it takes to, say, hook up a different data source, but I wouldn't actually get into walking through the code itself unless you feel you can't make your point otherwise. One thing I probably would like to see if I were in the audience is a demo of your code in action. Show me what is does, and tell me why that's cool.
I hope it goes well!
Here is my advice:
Be clear who your audience is and what your message is - Are you trying to impress six faculty members who are marking your project, or proving you can entertain the whole audience.
Have a Contents page early on - that way the audience know what to expect.
Put the geek stuff in an appendix to your main presentation. That way you can dip into it ,for questions, but you will not loose the main point of your talk.
Make sure your presentation flows and tells a story - limit slide numbers and don't clutter them e.g. project goals,possible uses, design challenges, software choice, what you did (limit techie), results (demo), results and limitations, next steps, questions.
Have a Conclusions page at the end -- make sure you circle back and cross refer to your original contents page.
Leave 15-20% of your time for questions. This will reveal what the audience is interested in, and allow you to display a deeper understanding of the topic i.e. only do live coding if they ask for it.
Rehearse out loud even if you feel stupid doing it.
Good luck.
A few tips
Use a common technical language. only use terms that the hearing will recognize.
It links what you expose yourself, with examples recognizable by the audience.
you can also read these great articles.
11 Top Tips for a Successful Technical Presentation
Tips for a Successful Technical Presentation
Bye.
Mix and match some topic everybody know. It has helped me to theme slides with images ranging from the Divine Comedy to the Simpsons I don't know how formal is your presentation but it's a common constructivist technique to hook on something your audiente already know to show your point.
I once attended a presentation of Larry Wall where he explained Perl 6 features using examples from golf mixed with the Lord of the Ring.
What I do is to talk analogies, try to convert to real world the terms you are explaining.
BTW, Why are you talking about software tech aspects to non tech people?? You have to target the content to your audience first. Who is your main audience?? The techies or non techies, choose one.
Regards,
I'd be inclined to not use code (unless you actually have to), and use some form of generic (and straightforward) pseudocode.
Also, if you are doing the talk with prompt cards, put 'Breathe!' at the top of the cards. It helped me...
Focus on the user interface (aka how it makes their lives easier) and how it is different from similar products (why they should listen.)
I think Simon Peyton Jones gives excellent talks. See the How to give a good research talk section on this page. In particular, check out the video of his talk about the subject linked to in that section. You can find other videos out there of his talks on Haskell, functional programming, etc. to see how he practices what he preaches.
Please listen to the following podcast : Manager Tools - Presentation basic
It will cover all the basics you need to do effective presentations.
Now when doing project presentations do the following:
Create a High Level Architecture model ... see this model you can probably do better (note: the model image is from my blog.).
Create a High level requirement list
Create a application workflow process diagram (once again pretty colors, arrows and blocks). This model will show how a user is expected to work with the application in order to solve its main task.
In order the present the application first show them the requirement list and talk about them, then the high level architecture and finally the application workflow process diagram which can be followed by a live demo.
The most important rule is to present at a fairly high level with lots of diagrams and models to show what you are talking about.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
For instance, customers that we're creating web sites for, request things like:
all links should open in a new window
put custom 'Back' button on every
page while there is a working
browser's equivalent
make some part of the text blinking etc.
Of course I tell them it's wrong, but is there some nice list of bad things to have from a respected source that I can point them to?
Become that respected source. Seriously: if your clients are showing reluctance to take your advice directly, compose documents that illustrate good and bad user interface design and publish it on your website. You gain three things from this:
You become more knowledgeable about the why of bad and good design. Having to think through something to compose it into a document is more helpful than many give it credit for.
If this is publicly published, you probably will get feedback about your ideas. Throw away the bad suggestions and integrate the good, and you become better at your craft.
You have the source for these discussions in a presentable format, yet you retain all your personal branding. If you include examples and demos of the good and bad, most people can see why you advocate for your ideas.
EDIT: epotter is dead on as far as the "buck stops here" aspect of interacting with a client. If your documents can show why irritating a user is a loss of revenue in the long run, it is unlikely you will have much push-back. On the other hand, if your personal preferences includes UI designs that don't help with retention... stop doing that. (I recall the days of "CSS Only, No Tables" designers before CSS had matured: they insisted on forcing their designs on clients, even though in some browsers they didn't render well. While a cause is admirable, you work for the client not a cause.)
Always try and show them how it will cost them money. For example, if they are going to do something that annoys the user, they will have less traffic which will lead to less revenue.
For better or worse, dollars always speak the loudest.
First, don't tell them it's wrong.
They may take it personally.
Instead, understand the need they are trying to fill, then suggest alternatives that don't include the bad behavior. Mock all the alternatives up and point out the good and bad of each one. Let them choose. As long as you have a good alternative, and sufficiently pointed out the faults of the bad implementation, then they generally come around to your point of view.
In other words, act like a designer. When a customer says, "I want green text on a red background," you don't immediately tell them that 10% of the world's males cannot read that, you first need to understand why. "Well, it's Christmas," then you can suggest alternate themes to give the site a festive feel without the design error. As long as the mockups you suggest are better than theirs then they will generally acquiesce.
Not because they made an error, but because you saw their real need and improved on their idea.
If they're adamant after that, though, do the work - don't spend your time trying to convince them the error of their design sense, it's a waste of resources.
Educate them over the long term, but if it takes you an hour to convince them not to make a change, that's one hour you could have spent improving your relationship with customers who treat you as designers rather than web-monkeys.
-Adam
I've had to play a semi-sales role at time with web projects and I have to stress how important it is to keep the customer happy.
Nevertheless, I completely agree with you that you are obligated to say something in the name of giving them what they want. I always found that the best approach is to start by agreeing with them (in principal at least). You could say,
"I completely agree with you that this
text is very important to your users.
Many testers that I've worked with
have strongly preferred using this
font/graphic/color to call out
critical text. Unfortunately, some
users associate flashing text with ads
and avoid it"
I find that this approach lets them know that you
Understand what they want
Appreciate their motivations and suggestions
Only want to help
One last word of advice, if after the gentle nudging, they don't get the point, consider doing two quick mock-ups. (their idea and yours). If that doesn't work, then just give them what they want. In the end, they pays the bills and if they really want an ugly site (assuming you can't afford to turn away business on aesthetic grounds) just give them the site.
Good luck and take deep breaths!
Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox has been an invaluable source of common-sense usability advice for me for many years. Here's something he wrote way back in 1996 that still applies today:
The BACK feature is an absolutely
essential safety net that gives users
the confidence to navigate freely in
the knowledge that they can always get
back to firm ground. We have known
from some of the earliest studies of
user navigation behaviorthat BACK is
the second-most used navigation
feature in Web browsers (after the
simple "click on a link to follow it"
action). Thus, breaking the BACK
button is no less than a usability
catastrophe.
And here are the first two of his Top Ten Web Design Mistakes of 1999:
Breaking or Slowing Down the Back Button
The Back button is the lifeline
of the Web user and the second-most
used navigation feature (after
following hypertext links). Users
happily know that they can try
anything on the Web and always be
saved by a click or two on Back to
return them to familiar territory.
Except, of course, for those sites
that break Back by committing one of
these design sins:
opening a new browser window (see mistake #2)
using an immediate redirect: every time the user clicks Back, the
browser returns to a page that bounces the user forward to the undesired location
prevents caching such that the Back navigation requires a fresh trip
to the server; all hypertext navigation should be sub-second and
this goes double for backtracking
Opening New Browser Windows
Opening up new browser windows is like a
vacuum cleaner sales person who starts
a visit by emptying an ash tray on the
customer's carpet. Don't pollute my
screen with any more windows, thanks
(particularly since current operating
systems have miserable window
management). If I want a new window, I
will open it myself!
Designers open new browser windows on
the theory that it keeps users on
their site. But even disregarding the
user-hostile message implied in taking
over the user's machine, the strategy
is self-defeating since it disables
the Back button which is the normal
way users return to previous sites.
Users often don't notice that a new
window has opened, especially if they
are using a small monitor where the
windows are maximized to fill up the
screen. So a user who tries to return
to the origin will be confused by a
grayed out Back button.
These aren't crazy newfangled ideas, they're decade-old guidelines based on hard research. You'd need a really, really, really good excuse to repeat a decade-old mistake.
Find examples of actual pages that do this and show them. Here's a good place to find some.
If you show them the examples, and instead of being awed by the suckyness and changing their minds, the clients say, "Yeah! That's exactly what I want!", then make them sign a nondisclosure contract saying they'll never tell anyone who designed their web site. :)
You have to explain "why". It's not enough to tell them something is "wrong" (and in these cases, it's not so much "wrong" as it is a "bad idea")
Most people respond well to logic and reason. If you can make a reasoned argument for why doing something a certain way is a bad idea, they'll usually bow down to your experience and knowledge.
useit.com is an excellent resource for usability arguments
but you're probably wasting your time. Either do it their way ("the customer is always right") or walk away - arguing is unlikely to improve the situation unless you can demonstrate a significant monetary gain from not doing it their way, which you probably cannot do given the issues you listed.
if your name will be on the site, i'd politely walk away
Show them some articles on sites like http://useit.com which has some empirical studies on how adherence to web standard practices increases usability and so therefore user satisfaction and so therefore profit.
Ask them what results they're after. "Have all links open in a new window" is a statement of solution. Solutions are your job, the client's job is to state objectives.
Start with this: "Oh, you'd like links to open in a new window. Tell me more about why you want that - I'd like to explore with you whether there are alternate ways of getting the same results."
Perhaps continue with this: "Also, I might point your attention to other consequences of opening all links in a new window - consequences you might not have considered, and which perhaps you wouldn't like."
Suggested reading: Dale Emery's articles on resistance.
At the simplest, try to explain them each of it in a user understandable manner.
e.g. Blinking text is an old style thing not supported by all browsers
Not sure why "back" can be a problem. But put your viewpoint.
It's always convincing if you demonstrate to the user that his design is unconventional or wrong by showing a list of very well known websites that he would "respect" and pointing out how they don't do X. Your customer will probably want his site to be like the big players' web sites.
If he still insists that his weird design makes sense you could say: "yes, I agree that sounds like a good idea in theory, but the fact is that users are simply unaccustomed to X and would walk away from your website if it diverges too widely from the standard way of doing things".
IOW, when all else fails, use fear.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
With customers (of any type), the best you can do is inform them of their choices, and why they are not the best ones and then leave it. If it's really bad, require sign-off stating that they find that design acceptable. Do you want to be 'right' or do you want to get something into the customer's hands that works?
If it completely impedes a working solution, then (and only then) should you stand on principle, but beware you have very few (if any) of these 'stands', so use them wisely. Be prepared to walk away.
Paul.
Unless there is a compelling business case NOT to do it (and I'm not sure this is the case with any of your examples) then if the customer is adamant DO IT! They are paying for it after all. They can always find someone else who will do it if you won't!
I am working in the web dept of a large legal firm, and among other things am responsible for maintaining a professional look for all our email communications (over 600 pieces per year).
Right now I am in a rut. Using a lot of pressure and manipulation, a person in management got to "art direct" a couple of HTML emails working directly with a member of my team and I caught the design at the last moment.
Her "designs" introduced background images behind the text of the emails along with additional, high-contrast imagery sitting behind the title in the header.
I ended up mandating a design change, however she is very insistent on "her" design and questioning all my reasoning for simplifying the look.
Basically she is questioning my expertise and asking for "proof" that her design is not user friendly.
I have the meeting in a couple of hours and was wondering if anyone here could point me to resources that discuss these specific items:
Argument against background images positioned behind the copy of an email. The images are at about 10% opacity, which makes them incomprehensible, and makes the design busy and ugly (my perspective).
Argument against high-contrast images behind titles.
Now, I am aware of the technical implications of including images in HTML emails, Outlook 2007 not loading background images etc. This is not necessary a technical issue, but a serious aesthetic/usability step in the wrong direction.
Thank you!
Facts:
Common sense in communicating dictates that anything that distracts you away from the message -- the content of the emails is not a good idea.
Is there images in the background of your letter heads and on all your invoices? Why so? Why not?
What do background images contribute to the value and perception of the message, the image of your corporation? Is it clearly known the impacts they have?
Go take a look at email newsletter sites. They are covered in guides and tutorials on how to email market effectively.
www.icontact.com
www.constantcontact.com
and so on..
Opinions:
Emails are not meant to be flyers. They are meant to communicate, clearly, simply and concisely while bringing a professional image. Making it look like a cartoon, or a flower shop, or whatever else you are dealing with probably doesn't add to it.
The issue you may run into is she is taking it personally because she is attached to the design for personal reasons and not designing for the needs of the business. So an attack on the design is an attack on her. She is too involved with her ego of looking good and avoiding looking bad or wanting some kind of glory.
Simply put, she should be the one qualifying to you why it IS good design, not the other way around. If she doesn't know, why is she asking you to prove it to her? How would she understand?
There's a book called Dealing with difficult people that may be of use to you.
Of course, if common sense was really common we wouldn't have to point it out as being common sense.
Update us on what happens!
http://www.asciiribbon.org/.
They have a lot of points on why not to use HTML ect, in emails.
Quite a few e-mail clients do not support HTML e-mail.
Other clients have a very poor or broken HTML rendering, causing the messages to be unreadable as well.
Sending HTML e-mails causes great overhead, and is very inefficient.
People that are limited to a text-only terminal, people with disabilities, blind people, basically anyone that cannot use a graphical interface easily or at all, are likely unable to read your mail.
(Extract from link)
In addition to what others have said, consider legal accessibility requirements. I found one example of the US Department of Education accessibility requirements. I'm sure searching for this one can find more examples.
Although it doesn't really apply, you may be able to reference the Americans With Disabilities Act, assuming you're in America.
Also, since you're sending HTTP formatted mail, maybe the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 are of interest. For example, Guideline 2.2 of this document states "Ensure that foreground and background color combinations provide sufficient contrast when viewed by someone having color deficits or when viewed on a black and white screen."
A professional email should only be graphic-intensive if those graphics either emulate the look of the company stationary, emulates the look of the company site, or if the graphics are interactive. A common example where this makes reasonable sense would be billing emails from Amazon.com. Note, however, that the content itself does not actually have any graphics, only the frame above, below, and to the sides of the content uses graphics. Similar stuff shows up in banking emails and paypal emails. This sort of thing makes it easier for people to associate the email with the site and makes for nicer printed records that match the online version of the same records.
For standard communication, I'd just go with a header and/or footer graphic.
What I did was escalate to a person who has both the position and understanding of the importance of the issue. Also, presented a version with a cleaner design. Made sure to address all objectives, and did not imply that design decisions are open to discussion.
I HATE email with designs and pictures on it. It is unprofessional IMO
I hate them.
the desirability/niceness of designs and art are subjective. So, how can you be sure all the people who receive them will appreciate them.
For me they are a big turnoff.
Also consider looking up some references in Human Factors engineering texts that show readibility studies. I bet a quick library search in this area would yield much scientific data that her way causing reading errors, eye strain and or slower reading speed.