Webword Statistics - Recent Comments

last updated:16 Aug 2002 13: 32 Webword time, or 16 Aug 2002 18:32 UK time

Webword Statistics - Recent Comments
(Comments added for week ending Sun 06 Jan 2002) | View Other Weeks

Something interesting happened on WebWord today. Two comments were posted by JS for this weblog entry. The first was a regular posting, but the second posting was a comment about the first comment. Sounds like a typical situation, right? One person writes something and another person responds. However, in this case, there was a twist. As it turns out, two different people posted comments on WebWord as JS. Unfortunately, there is no way around this issue (at least with Greymatter running). Any person could easily post comments as JS and they could even use a bogus email address to validate the posting. In effect, someone could spoof the identity of JS or any other person and the users of this site would not have any clue. This is very frustrating. Off the top of my head, I can think of three ways around this problem: (1) Set up a registration system with unique IDs and passwords (like Slashdot) which means moving away from Greymatter, (2) Display user IP addresses when they post, or (3) Do not allow users to post comments. The first solution is bad because it means moving away from Greymatter. The second solution is bad because of privacy concerns. The third solution is as bad as the first solution. In effect, these solutions are not real solutions. Ive rambled on enough. The bottom line is that this is a concern here and other places online. Im curious what you think about this. It is an interesting yet frustrating topic.

Sat 05 Jan 00:37 | Eric Scheid | (4) you could ask people to use their real name, instead of psuedonyms, handles, and masquarade-ball masks. Not every security solution needs to be technological.

Sat 05 Jan 00:43 | MadMan | And how would you enforce it, Eric? You could *ask*, but you can't *make* them do it. (There, I've just posted using my nickname, but I've never pretended to be anyone else or said anything defamatory, etc.)

Sat 05 Jan 01:18 | Jack Schonchin | I would much prefer the site run slashcode for a Slashdot-type interface. But you'd need to disable the user moderation because we don't have enough active users to make the mod system fair. Second best option is a login system for unique I.D.s, but with cookies to remember return users so we don't have to login each time we visit.

Sat 05 Jan 05:48 | Matt Round | Perhaps an optional registration system would be effective? Comments made by registered users would be presented with their name as a bold link, whereas others would just be plain text. It wouldn't eliminate the problem altogether, but if done with great care wouldn't discourage commenting either. Oh, and please don't remove the email/homepage fields from the comments system. Signal vs. Noise doesn't include such things and so comments might as well be anonymous (even with my fairly unusual name I've been confused with other people; finally got to the top on Google though, which helps).

Sat 05 Jan 06:22 | Stephen Downes | If Greymatter doesn't allow unique user IDs the you should consider moving to a different system. People should be able to reserve their own name for comments if they desire; it's what generates 'street cred' on the net. Many comment systems enable a unique registration. Allow anonymous postings as well - not everybody wants to fill in a form or sign their name. Do not post their IP. Not only is it a breach of privacy, it is also unreliable - many people are assigned dynamic IPs, meaning their IP changes from day to day.

Sun 06 Jan 12:16 | Anonymous Coward | Aiy Aiy Aiy! I think ditching slashCode was a bad move...

Book Review: Designing from Both Sides of the Screen | Sat 05 Jan

(WebWord) Designing from Both Sides of the Screen doesnt do a great job introducing usability and it doesnt do a great job explaining usability testing. Also, it is too focused on Hubbub to the exclusion of reviewing other instant messengers.

Sun 06 Jan 00:56 | Stephen Downes | Good review and I appreciate your writing it. I learned some things: I found out about Hubbub, which I had mever heard of, and I got some references to good books on usability, especially The Design of Everyday Things by Don Norman, a topic I've thought about but didn't know there was a book about.

WebWord Comment | Wed 02 Jan

The recent WebWord weblog entry about Amazons accessibility site generated many comments. Then I started thinking about WebWord. Is WebWord accessible? After all, this is a site about usability; accessibility is something that I care about and talk about. I remember doing some accessibility testing many months ago, but I cant remember all of the results. I remember a few problems. For example, I use tables in a way that is not quite right and I dont use ALT tags in most places. Shame on me! Then again, does it really matter? Does it impact my credibility? Im not sure. Surprisingly, I have never had anyone complain about the accessibility of WebWord. Perhaps I drove them away before they had a chance to complain (or make recommendations). By the way, if you want to take this opportunity to point out any problems, that would be fine. If I have the time, Ill make the changes.

Thu 03 Jan 00:12 | Jack Schonchin | Does it matter? Yes. The Americans with Disabilities Act is civil rights legislation. A non-accessible web site is a civil rights issue. It is discrimination. Here's the common example... if you were a restaurant owner and you refused service to a customer because of their skin color, it would be fruitless to: 1. Claim ignorance of the law. 2. Hope for a grace period to comply with the law. 3. Hope to escape prosecution. Suppose your brick 'n' mortar store was sued for an inaccessible bathroom. You can: 1) settle out of court. 2) burn money until you settle out of court. 3) lose in court and pay damages. Lawyers love ADA suits because they are open and shut. It really doesn't matter whether you had ill will or were just clueless about people with disabilities or whether your city or county ok'd your construction plans. You are responsible for not discriminating. When, and I do mean when, the ADA is specifically interpreted to apply to web sites, there will be a mad Y2K-like rush for web developers to retrofit web sites.

Thu 03 Jan 08:54 | jan | It would be extremely difficult for any body to enforce disability standards on the web; I would be surprised if any site was 100% accessible to 100% of people, disabled or not. However, it makes good business sense to provide accessibility for the largest audience possible. Perhaps instead of legislating access, we should let the market dictate the requirements. There's also the possibility that technology will make these standards unnecessary in the future.

Thu 03 Jan 09:27 | Joe Clark | It is not particularly difficult to 'enforce disability standards on the Web'; lots of governments do it. 100% access for everyone is not the goal, nor is it legally required. 'The market' has resolutely failed to provide access and will continue to fail. Legal requirements are necessary. Just the usual free-market-does-everything claptrap from Jan, who doesn't know what she's talking about.

Thu 03 Jan 10:18 | Jack Schonchin | Ya, accessibility is already legislated by Section 508 for U.S. federal agencies and organizations that receive certain types of federal funds. Enforcement will occur naturally through the courts as has occurred with physical-world ADA issues. Jan's reaction is common among people who see the W3C standards as confusing, murky, unneccessary or unachievable. I think Jan is in the unachievable camp.

Thu 03 Jan 10:41 | jan | Claptrap? Hmmmm. You're right. I wasn't aware that enforcing disability standards was high on any government's to-do list. It seems that most of the time, governments are more interested in limiting our access than in making sure we have access. But legislation is not the answer. Governments have been trying to legislate morality and ethics as long as there have been governments & it never works. People (and businesses) just find ways to circumvent the laws they don't like. Who will enforce these access requirements? Do I really want my tax money spent on this when there are people who don't have adequate shelter, clothing or food? Do those same people care that they don't have access when their bellies are rumbling with hunger? Are we willing to see our grandmas put in jail because they forgot to include alt tags on their web pages? Why shouldn't we make 100% access a goal? By saying it isn't a goal, aren't you discriminating against whatever percentage of people don't have access? What percent do you intend to leave out? I would love to see everything in society 100% accessible to all people, regardless of disability, creed, color or any other potentially limiting factor. Maybe instead of trying to force people to comply, we should educate them, emphasizing the positive returns of making websites accessible. I can't see any designer/developer balking at adding something as simple as an img alt tag to his/her documents. Most accessibility standards are relatively easy to implement. Awareness is the key. Intead of pouring money into enforcement, why not put money into research that will help all disabled people interact more fully with the whole of society instead of just one small part?

Thu 03 Jan 11:25 | Jack Schonchin | The ADA is enforced via lawsuits and the fear of lawsuits brings even greater compliance without government action. Legislation *is* the answer. Do you oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act? Do you think discrimination ends voluntarily? I'd like to live in your world.

Thu 03 Jan 11:51 | jan | I don't have a legal background and am curious: Setting moral judgments aside for the moment, would the U.S. First Amendment be a defense against Web accessibilty lawsuits? The Web is a form of communication. The First Amendment gives us free speech, which, conversely, gives us the right to not speak to a person or group of people. If a business argued that its website was designed as a communication tool, and further argued that it did not want to reach a certain Web audience segment, so did not design for that audience, would that argument be valid in court?

Thu 03 Jan 13:09 | jan | Ignorance is at the root of most discrimination. Yes, we had to pass the Civil Rights Act. Yes, we had to pass the ADA act. But in passing those acts, did we get rid of discrimination? No, although we may have tempered its more virulent, public symptoms. We will not rid ourselves of discrimination unless and until individual attitudes change. And attitudes won't change until people get first-hand, positive knowledge of the group they're discriminating against. Many times, people just miss the obvious; they change their thinking when injustice is pointed out. Some people will never change, though, no matter how logical an argument is. Those are the people (I hope they're the minority) for whom you are really writing legislation. Instead of reacting to problems with a lawsuit, wouldn't it make more sense to first tell a company about the problems people are experiencing, then ask the company to effect changes? If the company refuses, then take action. There are probably many companies that simply have not thought about how people interact w/their sites (isn't that why we study usability?). Common sense tells us that we should strive for the widest possible audience, but we design as individuals and don't always think of others in our audiences who aren't just like us. Education and awareness are critical. As to living in my world: Maybe if more people lived in my world, the world would be a better place. We would be tolerant of others' differences, we would be more compassionate and more willing to help our fellow person. And we would teach our children to be the same. I still have hope that someday my world will be the world we all live in.

Thu 03 Jan 18:00 | Assistive Technologist | John, If you want to test out your site's accessiblity, why not try running through it a few times (with your monitor off) using the IBM Home Page Reader. You can download it at: http://www-3.ibm.com/able/hprtrial3.html From what ive tested, I had a hard time navigating thru it.

Fri 04 Jan 08:48 | Joe Clark | Jan's problem, you see, is her complete ignorance of the entire history of disability activism, accommodation, and disability rights, of which Web access is merely an extension. Her willingness to expose her thorough ignorance to the world is, I suppose, brave.

Fri 04 Jan 13:35 | jan | Thanks for that enlightened reply, Joe. It's given me a much better grasp of your viewpoint. I do understand disability activism and its history. I also understand the need for laws regarding disability access in public buildings. I just don't agree with legislating Internet access. One would think from the comments I've seen that web developers do nothing all day but sit at their PCs, thinking of obstacles they can put in the way of potential customers. Do you really think if developers were aware of disability standards, they would refuse to implement them? Why alienate a potential customer base? As for sites that were developed before disability standards were implemented: Do the webmasters even know about the standards? Does legislation provide for informing every company about these standards so that new development may include them and already-developed pages may be updated? Where is the justice in allowing a company to be sued when the company doesn't even know it's in violation of a standard. Disability access in public buildings is guaranteed through inspections. Contractors know the rules because they are published as part of the Universal Building Code. But where is the Universal Development Code for the Web? Has it been disseminated to all companies who have or will potentially have web pages? I'm not referring to having people go out to a website, I'm talking about sending an explicit document to the web decisionmakers at every company. I have systematically been going through our web pages to upgrade them according to the standards, not because a law is forcing me to do it, but because it's the right thing to do and because broadening our audience can only be good for business. If I can make my small corner of the web more accessible, then the whole Internet just becomes that much better. My challenge to all of you, who claim to be passionate about disability web access, is to do the same. Bring every page you've every published to the web up-to-date with the standards. If you're a contractor, you owe it to the companies for whom you've developed pages to educate them and ensure that their pages are up-to-date. After all, your name will be on that lawsuit, too, as the expert who developed the site.

Sat 05 Jan 15:04 | Joe Clark | To answer the only substantive questions posed by Jan: The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines became a W3C recommendation (the closest they come to a standard, itself a serious deficiency) in May 1999. Section 508 was known to be coming down the pike for 2.5 years before its effective date in mid-2001 (and its specifics were known six months before that). Web developers have had nearly three years to get their act together. It goes without saying that accessibility is merely one of the W3C recommendations that has been widely ignored. It is not necessary to upgrade every single page you've ever created, though it would be salutary to do so. My upcoming book gives a range of upgrade techniques, including 'Make all new pages accessible and upgrade every old page you touch for any reason' � the strategy most developers would adopt and one that meets any standard of reasonable accommodation.

WebWord Comment | Fri 04 Jan

I just read Designing from Both Sides of the Screen: How Designers and Engineers Can Collaborate to Build Cooperative Technology by Ellen Isaacs and Alan Walendowski. I did not think the book was very good. While there are a few things I liked, overall it was not a good book in my opinion. Here is my dilemma: Do I spend time writing a review that tells you not to buy the book? On the one hand, if I write the negative review at least I can explain why I didnt like it. I can also explain some of important and useful points so that you can get the good information without buying the book. On the other hand, by writing a review, I will be using up precious time and energy. I could be reading something else, doing something that I actually enjoy. What do you think? What is the best way to handle writing a negative review? If you were in my shoes, what would you do?

Sat 05 Jan 06:16 | Stephen Downes | Write the review. A negative review is still a positive contribution. Even though you are not recommending the book, you are providing information about its scope and content. Your readers will learn about the book and what it has to say. In addition, you can you use your comments about the book to develp some positive points. If the book is flawed, explain the flaw and sketch what a proper treatment of the subject would be. Some of my best columns have started as criticisms.

Sat 05 Jan 06:18 | Laurel | Please write up bad reviews and explain why you don�t like a book, apart from being informative, it helps us understand your criteria for the books you do like, and besides, you don�t want your reviews to be a long list of books to buy at Amazon, right? It�s good to know you don�t like *everything*!

Sat 05 Jan 12:39 | Lynne | Write the negative review...it's simply an aspect of the service you provide, and does what you love to do: inform and influence and offer choices for us to consider...with well thought out reasons for or against. If you only painted a rosy picture you wouldn't be very interesting, and might even be suspect as to the level of your discernment. And you do see very clearly!

Sat 05 Jan 12:45 | Jeff Justice | Write the review. I hate to think how much money I have wasted buying books that start out good and then don't go where I was expecting. You didn't waste your time reading the the book unless you don't write a review. Should YOUR readers waste their time too? In some cases it may stop poor authors from getting any more published, which is a good thing.

Operating System Sucks-Rules-O-Meter | Fri 04 Jan

This operating system quality and approval metric is based on a periodic AltaVista search for each of several operating systems, directly followed by sucks, rules, or rocks. (Comments: This is based on Altavista searches. Fine. However, I wonder how the results would look based on Google searches?)

Fri 04 Jan 23:12 | John S. Rhodes | In case you were wondering, here are the Google results: linux sucks 145,000 linux rocks 84,000 linux rules 570,000 windows sucks 184,000 windows rocks 308,000 windows rules 1,310,000 Silly stuff, don't you think? Do these kinds of 'ratings' erally matter at all? Are they valid at all?

Sat 05 Jan 00:50 | MadMan | I'm sure the CIO considering Windows or Linux will use this as the ultimate guide - Not! It's amusing, but of no real world relevance whatsoever. People still use Altavista? Apparently, they're finally indexing web pages again. That's good news, considering that their indexes have been stagnating for several months. (Reference: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-7630946.html ) I don't know why they bother any more. The battle of the search engines has been won by Google, who can't seem to do anything wrong. Pity. I still remember how they were the first 'real' search engine on the Net (as opposed to Yahoo, which was just a directory.) Then Altavista went 'portal' with a vengeance, and totally messed up their site (anyone remember stupid hyperlinks like 'shop for 'removing coffee stains' at BarnesAndNobel.com' ?) Years later, they learned their lesson and introduced a home page without all the e-commerce plugs. They even introduced a plain text search called Raging Search. (www.raging.com) But it was too late. There's a lesson in this. Don't try to be everything to everyone. It just doesn't work. I'm curious: how many of you still use Altavista as your primary search engine, if you use it at all?

Sat 05 Jan 00:56 | MadMan | OK, I was slightly off the mark there. Lycos, WebCrawler, Excite and Infoseek were live before Altavista. However, AV was the most famous at the time.

Sat 05 Jan 03:11 | Jack Schonchin | Oh Google can do something wrong. Their e-mail autoresponder gives a blurb about their reading every e-mail and that they try to respond personally when they can. However, since they became popular I've noticed the number of personal responses drop to near zero (in my case). Plus, after I gave them a list of usability issues they said they'd give me a free t-shirt, but I'm still waiting. (I live for free t-shirts.) I will retell this story every chance I get because I relish wallowing in such petty whining.

Sat 05 Jan 09:19 | Eric Scheid | I too was promised a google pack on two seperate occasions but am yet to see anything arrive.

Magic SysRq Key | Fri 04 Jan

When all is said an done, (literally a second after hitting it), youll be looking at a login prompt.

Fri 04 Jan 23:00 | John S. Rhodes | A bit more powerful than Cntl-Alt-Del... MAGIC SYSRQ KEY DOCUMENTATION v1.32 The Magic SysRq Key (OSFAQ) Configuring the magic SysRq key and how to use it

Us Versus Them | Thu 03 Jan

(Communication Arts) Consequently, many Web designers suffer from a poverty of knowledge, practice, history, critical evaluation, and craftsmanship, and this is ultimately reflected in their work. Instead of rigorous self-evaluation and a well-trained eye, anything goes and everything does. The derivative, the clich�d, the unusable, and the confusing are launched everyday on commercial sites. But by golly, the buttons look so real you could touch them.

Fri 04 Jan 16:24 | Jack Schonchin | Yes, but there is little real knowledge searched out. The clients don't know what is possible, and the designers rarely test. Nor do they expand their techniques in user focussed directions, prefering 'creativity' whatever that might mean.

Fri 04 Jan 21:11 | Jack Schonchin | For clarification, the above poster 'JS' is not the same JS who has been posting on this web site for some time. You can identify me by my Yahoo address and my jaded viewpoint.

The Lord of the Rings | Thu 03 Jan

(Hollywood Industry) In some cases, sets were built as perspective rooms. Sets were often built in two distinct sizes to accommodate the scale issues and most of the props were created in two scales to serve the variety of characters on the project, from hobbit to Gandalf size. Everything from furniture to vegetables in Bilbo Baggins� garden were produced in both small and large sizes. (Comments: Dont miss parts 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.)

Fri 04 Jan 21:10 | Jack Schonchin | You don't want to know what I thought of the film.

WebWord Comment | Wed 29 Aug

A few days ago a WebWord reader sent me a note about Internet Explorer. He said that when he used to type in incorrect URLs in Internet Explorer, he was merely sent to an error page. End of story. However, he recently noticed that when he types in the wrong URL into Internet Explorer now, he is sent to an MSN page. I noticed the same damn thing. Now were shown an actual MSN search page bearing the MSN logo. Maybe this isnt total bullshit, but it is certainly offensive. Unfortunately, since I am using their free software, they have me by the balls. How else is Microsoft controlling my browing experience? I think that I am going to have to start looking into alternative browsers. Dont be fooled, there are choices. But, Im not sure how I could ever live without my Google toolbar. To run it, you need Internet Explorer 5.0 or 5.5.

Fri 04 Jan 20:13 | Gruenbaer | Non Opera site: Hi there, I just found the some above comment that Opera supports every single page...well, here's an exception: http://www.cdcovers.cc Anyway Opera 6 is a very nice piece of browser, but alone it wouldn't work for me. I need IE6 sometimes. BTW, thats not the only site that doesn't work :) Yo, Emil

Personality 101: Who Are They? | Wed 02 Jan

(GrokDotCom) For each personality, Ill give you a general profile, then some specific comments that include the dominant attitude that characterizes this personality, how this personality type typically uses time, the question this personality type is most likely to ask about your product or service and website tactics you should adopt to meet the needs of this personality type. Finally, Ill give you some sample copy - same copy for each profile, but youll notice different elements in the copy appeal to different personality types.

Wed 02 Jan 21:27 | John S. Rhodes | This is a good introduction to the topic. I especially like the sample copy that is provided. All too often people write about personalities and personality tests but don't give people anything practical to worth with. In this case, at least we have something to talk about. I also like this article because it blends usability (psychology, actually) and marketing.

Fri 04 Jan 11:39 | Ron Zeno | Pseudoscience at best. There is little evidence that such definitions and applications of �personality types� are meaningful or useful�

Symbolizing Accessibility | Wed 02 Jan

(Joe Clark) After half a decade of attempts and a misapplication of the �classic� wheelchair icon, we finally have something that might work as a generic indicator of accessibility � from Apple, of all places.

Thu 03 Jan 12:23 | Eric Scheid | Interesting rant from Joe, but now I'm thinking maybe I'm going blind ... I couldn't see an example of the Apple icon he espouses in his article.

Thu 03 Jan 19:03 | Brad Lauster | I believe the Universal Access icon is the one you are looking for. [link to the image from the article]

Fri 04 Jan 08:45 | Joe Clark | You mean in this table?

WebWord Comment | Wed 02 Jan

Im not looking for a job right now. However, just for giggles, I did a quick search on usability at Monster.com. There are currently 195 jobs listed using that search term. I did the same search on usability at Dice.com and there were 128 jobs listed. Interesting, if you ask me.

Thu 03 Jan 00:45 | Jack Schonchin | Interesting considering that job sites produce few actual hires. [msnbc]

Thu 03 Jan 13:23 | J K | If you look at the results of this search, you'll notice how few listings are really jobs to do with usability. They just have a keyword of usability in there. You really have to wade through. Incidentally, my current position (in the usability field) was first found using Monster.

Thu 03 Jan 17:59 | JK ROWLING | I agree with JK - people like to put the word 'Usability' in job descriptions, but the job itself will most of the time have nothing to do with Usability. It's a tuff market right now.

Fri 04 Jan 06:32 | MadMan | Job sites suck. They really do. According to a Forrester report (not that I put much stock in [BigResearchCo] reports), only 4% of people find jobs online. I could write a long explanation of why job sites don't work, but that would become an article by itself, and this place is just for posting comments. ;) M PS: Googling gave me this: http://cyberatlas.internet.com/markets/professional/article/0,1323,5971_306361,00.html PPS: I'd like to coin 'Googling' as an official term for searching on Google :P PPPS: John, Greymatter chokes on autoconverting URLs with commas in them. (Not that you can do much about it, but just FYI.)

WebWord Comment | Wed 02 Jan

I just finished reading Why We Buy by Paco Underhill. It is an excellent book about the science of shopping. Underhill and his associates at Envirosell have done thousands of hours of research on how people shop for items. It was short, easy to read, and interesting.

Wed 02 Jan 22:53 | John S. Rhodes | Paco Underhill and his colleagues at Envirosell have written several articles.

Thu 03 Jan 10:12 | Frank Lynch | There are several points Underhill raises that are relevant to the internet environment, even when he's talking about the physical environment. For instance, expectations that processes will be slow inhibit a shopper from visiting a store. Font sizes on the labels of analgesic bottles being too small for elder customers. Putting shopping baskets throughout a store to allow buyers to buy more than they initially planned on (akin to linking to customer service & search on every page). Items too close to the front door being poorly attended to, because the shopper is on an initial 'mission' and won't see them - - having implications for where someone might put cross sell on a web site. Etc. A great read all around.

WebWord Comment | Fri 28 Dec

I would like to be given a brief history of my previous actions on a web site. For example, imagine that you are visiting a retail web site and you are looking for an item. Suppose you find it but you dont add it to your shopping cart for some reason and then you leave the site. Now, imagine that you return to the site. I think it would be kind of cool for the site to give you quick links to the last 3 or 4 pages you visited when you were last at the site, perhaps in some logical order. This trail should be out of the way, yet still conceptually obvious (i.e., page titles act as links). This is a nice way to capitalize on recognition. That is, it doesnt force users to recall how they made it to those pages before. It also seems like it would help people pick up where they left off, or find familiar navigational cues. What are your thoughts on this?

Mon 31 Dec 08:30 | Frank Elbert | JS, what kind of browser do you use? I use IE5.5. It has a built-in 'history' feature. When I visit Amazon.com it nicely tracks all the productpages I visit, (see it happening with ctrl+h) and it stays there till i manually use 'clear history' in 'internet options'. This 'clear history'-feature is for handling the privacy issues you discribed. (because why would you delete your history anyway when you're the only user of your system?) It's someting like 'Taskbar Properties > Start Menu Programs > Documents Menu > CLEAR'. I like the history feature a lot. Because when I start my browser I instantly can enter my last Amazon session where I want. The proper 'title' conventions of Amazon helps a lot though. And the few times I am looking for 'embarassing stuff' I clean my history. When you looking for 'embarassing stuff' a lot you should buy your wife her own computer, and get some help... :) joking here.

Mon 31 Dec 11:34 | Rikard Linde | It could be useful if it's applied to weblog authoring, an undo/ history feature (similar to the History feature in Photoshop/ Illustrator...). Today however the weblog edit URLs don't contain much useful information, but it wouldn't be hard to change. The shameless self- promotion- department: My company is just getting started and the software is very very beta (all comments are welcome) but if there's demand for it we could build an API to people's browsing history. Then the user's browsing history reaches further than one site (or she could choose to restrict the feature to a certain site)! A prerequisite to this feature is that the user feels she can control the data being collected (and as you can see in the privacy policy we've started working on it): http://www.sprinterface.com Rikard

Mon 31 Dec 11:55 | Jack Schonchin | Frank, the 'clear history' control is buried in the Internet configuration menu. Privacy controls should be front-and-center. You know, a 'privacy' button next to Home, Refresh, etc. Most users never edit their settings. But more importantly, the History function does not span multiple windows. I regularly launch new windows and those new windows do not show up in my History list. I use IE 5.5.

Mon 31 Dec 11:59 | Jack Schonchin | An inter-session box seems like a more appropriate function of the browser itself. e.g., when you return to a web site you can access a context-sensitive list of related pages you've visited. I don't see why this kind of basic service should be hoisted on web site owners. It just leads to more confusion as yet-another-item to place on pages, that will be labeled something different on each site, located in a different area on each site, etc.

Mon 31 Dec 12:10 | The Inscrutable Gargoyle | JS, entirely agreed this ought to be a browser function. Infact, one can then explore, with privacy intact, many more scenarios, such as cross referencing with other sites or locally stored documents. You could see where all you went to compare prices. Local link trails in general may also be useful for adding document importance on top of google like stuff, i.e., which links did you actually follow.

Tue 01 Jan 16:11 | Frank Elbert | JS, I agree. Most of users are not aware of the 'clear history'-functionality. Adding a 'privacy'-button next to 'Home' would be desirable.

Wed 02 Jan 23:25 | amm | Wheretostay.com has a very simple mechanism that allows you to 'dog ear' a page (perfect terminology, imho). It doesn't require logging in so it's not private, but for my purposes, it works wonderfully. You just choose to 'dog ear' a page and it'll keep a list for you. It's the same as bookmarking, but doesn't clutter your own bookmarks, since it's specific to that site.

Don�t Blow Your Fuse(box) | Wed 02 Jan

(GrokDotCom) One of the most exciting Open Methodologies is called Fusebox, widely popular with development houses because its techniques, although originally developed for ColdFusion, can be applied easily to ASP, PHP, JSP, or any development language of your choice.

Wed 02 Jan 21:40 | John S. Rhodes | Hmm...what is this Fusebox stuff? Writings of Hal Helms Fusebox Mailing List Fusebox for PHP 10 ColdFusion Scripting Tips Fusebox methodologies in PHP

WebWord Comment | Mon 31 Dec

Ive been told that the latest WebWord Newsletter (Issue #64) has grammatical errors, misspellings, and other mistakes. Feel free to take a look at it and then let me know what you find wrong. Id love to know. In the next issue, Ill try to avoid the problems you find!

Mon 31 Dec 17:29 | Anita Rowland | The only error I found: 'You'll see that I left a few things out since Google does more than simple post your text.' where 'simple' s/b 'simply' not too bad, I think.

Mon 31 Dec 17:35 | Fr�d�ric Roland | The problem I see in Outlook 2000 is newsletter formating problem. It's so corrupted I can't read the newsletter. It may be my fault, it may be your but I don't know where to search :(.

Tue 01 Jan 15:39 | Jack Schonchin | I have to say the greatest error with the latest newsletter is that I never received a copy.

Wed 02 Jan 09:13 | jan | I haven't been getting your newsletters consistently, either.

Wed 02 Jan 13:24 | JB | I have read the newsletter, and there where no erros.

Wed 02 Jan 16:41 | Jack Schonchin | OK, I got a copy... here goes... these aren't errors, just suggestions for improving the newsletter presentation. 1) Don't use .... and ==== for line separators because they only look nice for people using a monospaced font. In other words, they look good for a total of 27 people in the entire world and only 2 of those people subscribe. ASCII art died with the demise of the monospaced font, and so has layout trimmings such as horizontal lines. 2) Don't tell me how many subscribers you have. If you must, then tell me in the footer that no one reads. I don't care. Tell me only when you reach a hallmark number. 3) Item #1 reads like an e-mail message instead of a newsletter section - and it actually includes your signature file! This is inconsistent with how the other items are presented. 4) After each item number you should list the article title! Right now you waste space saying 'A new WebWord.com article is now online:' Put that messy stuff at the end of the item blurb! In fact, do not even intro the URL, just list the URL. I cannot scan through the newsletter when the least important information is given prominence. I first must decide a web page is worth visiting by reading the item name and blurb, not by being shown the URL.

WebWord Comment | Fri 28 Dec

This is one of the coolest things I have seen regarding accessibility. Give it a try. Spend some time at this super slim Amazon web site.

Mon 31 Dec 09:44 | Joe Clark | I've been having various E-mails with the Amazon executive, who seems unable to grasp simple concepts like 'Your 'accessible' site makes it impossible to do things the real site does.' They're quite convinced their way of doing things is the right one despite mounting expert evidence.

Wed 02 Jan 12:07 | Blind User | Trying to make sense of this page with a screen reader is a bit difficult, especially for its size. The page does not put things in a logical order (the 'Find' edit box should come before the 'All products' pull-down box; it will then read 'Find (blank) in (All products)). Too many links, and the 'Shopping is safe' link should be banished to the very end of the page, as it is not as important in the task space as the form on the page and the links. They should at least download a free screen reader (such as IBM's HPR) and test it out before donning it 'accessible.' Giving it the 'access' name is really a misnomer here.

WebWord Comment | Mon 31 Dec

I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for spending time at WebWord. I know that you are busy and that your time is precious. 2001 was a good year for WebWord, both in terms of this web site but also in terms of our consulting business. Many people dont know that we do usability testing, and a whole lot more. In 2002 we are going to try to help a lot more people through this web site and by working with more clients. Thanks again for being here. Take care.

Tue 01 Jan 02:00 | MikeC | And thank you for giving us a place to go. Here's to another great year.

Wed 02 Jan 10:46 | Panagiotis | Thank you for the valuable information you provide us.