11 replies to this topic

[Adrian]

Do you go on the W3C site to check up on web standards but find its design a bit lacking considering the kind of things that can be done?

Well, why not have a go at redesigning it yourself!

WThRemix is a competition for people to submit fuly XHTML valid, tableless design layouts for the W3C.

Have a look at the site for more details, basically a lot of people feel that when the W3C site was redesigned fairly recently it could have been made to inspire web designers, but they don't seem to have done that. Can't say i'm keen on the navigation round the site myself.

[DianeV]

:-) There's navigation?

Personally, I think some time could be spent on using language that everyone can understand.

I mean, I suppose all of us could be called geeks, but some of the W3 documentation puts any of us to shame.

Perhaps a suggestion: they might consider who their target audience is.

[Adrian]

The language used has been commented on before as well, but, I like an explanation I've seen in a few places. The W3C standard specifications are just that, specifications, not a manual or a how to, but the rules of how the information should be set out.

Admittedly though it would be nice for some of the non-spec information on the ste to be a little easier to udnerstand!

[DianeV]

You're telling me!

I had seen an explanation like that too, and I quite understand. It's just that, if they would like those of us with a "lesser geek" status to actually use the data, they might consider writing for us. Otherwise, we have to plow through it (hello, headache!) or hope that somehow, somewhere it will come to us.

Hmm. Isn't this about ... usability?

[xelA]

Honestly, I don't think this is as bad as designing a "Bobby Friendly" site but a very close second.

[bragadocchio]

Hi Xela,

Are you saying that the site aimed at helping you make accessible web sites isn't very accessible?

I've stumbled over some of their discretionary questions myself.

I like this site on accessibility a lot:

http://www.diveintoaccessibility.org/

The author of the site delves into some of the language on the W3C.org pages on a regular basis in his blog, and does a good job of making many of their standards more understandable too. It's at:

http://www.diveintomark.org/

[Adrian]

The WThRemix competition winners have finally been announced.

I did have a quick look at all the entrants around the time the winners were meant to be announced, and to be honest, wasn't all that impressed with the field. I don't think anyone would deny that on most account they 'look' nicer than the current W3C site, but I think many have missed the point a bit.

One critisim of the W3C site is its usability and how you find things. Many of the 'redesigns' have stuck with a very similar layout and just changed how it looks. Some have changed the layout around and made it worse IMO. I think I would have had difficulty picking 1 winner and 4 runners up from that as i think I was only particularly impressed with about 3/4 of the designs.

Having said that, the winning site is superb from a visual point of view, despite the fact its stuck with the same overall structure of the W3C site, it does look stunning and all links have nice, clear rollovers to help the visuals. Its a stunning example of what you can do with full XHTML code, it validates to XHTML1 transitional and is designed with the Bobby accessability standards in mind.

I think I'd like to see the navigation structured a bit better, but perhaps that is something that would need to happen site wide as far as the W3C is concerned. The nav bars are all very clean though, nice subtle rollovers that show your on a link but don't grab your attention to much. And the layout of the blog type area in the middle with the updates is superb, clear title, clear date, clearly seperated from each and nice and easy to read.

Interesting competition, slightly dissapointed by some of the entries but a deserving winner

[bragadocchio]

I agree with you about the winning site, Adrian.

It's visually very appealing. Nice work, and an great example of what could be done with xhtml.

[DianeV]

I hadn't seen this during my hiatus. I agree; love the design and the vivid colors. My only thought would have been to narrow the navbar in order to make a wider space for content. Superb job.

[InaudiblePC]

Well at least the winner reduced the font size. I must say I hate visiting the real W3C site because the font is so large, I'm constantly scrolling and I feel as if the designers think their audience is blind. The least they could do is have a few seperate CSS pages defining different font sizes and you could chose large med or small, by clicking a small link at the top of the page. Thats the way to effectively implement CSS into a page. People who have used a site I have created with this aspect have always commented on it, they love it.

Edited by InaudiblePC, 30 July 2007 - 12:19 AM.

[nickelamerson]

You know, i check w3c for codes fixes and so on - but after so much time i can see every time
that websites with bad codes get's better location then "clean" web sites.

------------------------------------------
Removed link. Please keep self promotional links in the signature area. Add a signature link @ Control Panel > Personal Profile > Edit Signature

2ND and FINAL WARNING: You won't receive another.
------------------------------------------

Edited by Respree, 23 August 2007 - 07:31 PM.

[Autocrat]

(Thought I'd posted this already!)

Do we think they would carry out another competition anytime soon - I'd happily spend a week making designs, so long as they promise to get rid of that awful things they call a site.
(There is no defence... it's like driving around in a Yugo!)