Basic website Design Considerations

This SHOULD be for beginners only...

If you need help with basic HTML, go to this page. If you know how to write HTML and want to increase your audience satisfaction, you need to understand what IS worth doing and what IS NOT. 

First, some things that you probably should NOT do:

Reviewing some websites recently, I found examples of some practices that it may be best not to follow, unless specifically requested by the client, and the client understands the effect. Some of the sites I found these 'problems' on were commercially produced...

  • Slow-loading content or techniques that are designed to showcase the webmaster's skills rather than sell the client's products or ideas.
  • Navigation within the site that does not work
  • Navigation buttons or text that you don't realise are navigation buttons until you 'hover' over them
  • Text that looks like a navigation link but is not
  • Links to external sites that lose your audience to another website
  • Spelling and/or typographical errors
  • Ungrammatical copy and incorrect punctuation
  • Graphics that do not load at all
  • Animated graphics that run continuously
  • Centred text
  • Text that uses an 'unusual' and interesting font that cannot easily be read
  • Text in multiple font styles, just because you can
  • Text in multiple colours, just because you can
  • Text and background combinations that are difficult to read, particularly not red on blue. Apart from the fact that it looks horrible, it is bad for your audience's eyes - read this optical explanation
  • Marquee text that scrolls at an unreadable speed and/or size
  • Marquee field that is too small, making it difficult to understand the context of the words
  • Marquee text at all, really!
  • Overpowering background images over which you cannot read the text
  • Frames-based site (unless the client understands the limitations)
  • Wrongly sized tables that lead to content 'falling off the edge' of the page
  • Pages referred to on the Home Page that cannot be found easily, or at all

Recommendation:
Avoid the above unless specifically requested by the client, in which case be sure your client understands the drawbacks, and that you want your name associated with such a site.

 

Design to the client brief or your own ideas?

There are probably more ways to go about designing a website than you would imagine. Here are a few thoughts.

  • You could take a detailed brief and create the site to the client's exact requirements - a 'turnkey' website that is guaranteed(?) to satisfy the client.
  • You could take a broad outline brief and create the site the designer wants to create - another 'turnkey' website that may be "better designed" but which may hold some surprises for the client.
  • My preference is to use an iterative process that includes the client and the designer in a staged development of the website. This is my way...
    • During an initial website planning meeting, gain a consensus for a general plan for the site - site architecture, colour schemes, navigation type, etc.
    • Create a dummy site and publish it to a private development web server that the client can view.
    • The client can agree or amend the look and feel of the site before too much work is committed to the project.
    • Repeat the "improve and review" cycle until the client has a satisfactory website - one in which the client has played an important role in the design.

Recommendation:
Find a process that works best for you and your client, to meet the objectives - a website with which the client is delighted. Having a process in mind helps you be more productive. Be prepared to amend your preferred process, to that which your client prefers!

 

Design for the client's audience or your ego?

THE PRIMARY purpose of a website is usually to sell a product, service or idea, or to provide a source of information, to a specific target audience.

It should only be an accidental result that it also creates a showcase for the web designer to demonstrate their technical, artistic or design expertise.

Recommendation:
Do not spend your client's time and money designing features that are intended solely to show off your skills. Do not apply all the "bells and whistles" just because you can - the audience (and your client) may not appreciate them

 

Design by guru or on evidence?

A common piece of internet design advice from the 'gurus' is to "design for ALL your potential customers" regardless of browser, operating system, screen resolution, colour saturation.  That may not be realistically achievable.

I believe it is worth considering and reviewing that advice, in the light of evidence.   My advice is to consider whether the extra effort is matched by the incremental buying audience reached.  If the potential for increased sales is worth it, do it. If not, why do it?

The numbers used to illustrate my point (below) are from my website's visitor/hit counter which comes from www.thecounter.com.  The reference data collection period ended December 2002. In most cases there is some 'missing' percentage, which is the additive result of all the low numerical results, which each have below 0%.

Recommendation:
Find accurate data for YOUR or your client's website - it will be different from mine. But the point is, use the facts, not guesses. The data below is from woodbridgesuffolk.info for 2004.

 

Don't forget META TAG Keywords?

Wrong - do forget the meta tag keywords. Yes, really. You don't need them any longer. No (major) search engine has used meta tag keywords since the year 2000. Most stopped using them much earlier. Google, the most successful Search Engine yet, has never used them.

I asked Search Engine Optimisation guru Jill Whalen to confirm this. She replied:

"From: Jill Whalen
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 6:27 PM
Subject: RE: Keyword META tag

Hi Linn,
You're correct. It's not used by most of the major search engines, and not given much weight by the few that do. It certainly doesn't hurt to use it, but won't help much either.
I've discussed it a number of times in past issues of my newsletter. If you do a search on my site for "meta keywords" or "meta tags" you will probably find them.
Best,
Jill

P.S. You probably could use my SEO writing report The Nitty-gritty of Writing for the Search Engines http://www.highrankings.com/sgnittygritty

Recommendation:
1. DO NOT waste time writing meta tag KEYWORDS, they won't do any good (but I still do...).
2. DO NOT waste time removing them if you already have them. They won't do any harm either.

 

Design for all web browsers?

Internet Explorer 86.94%
Firefox 8.57%
Safari 3.17%
Netscape 0.50%
Opera 0.49%
Mozilla 0.22%
Mozilla Compatible Agent 0.03%
Camino 0.03%
Konqueror 0.03%
gzip 0

Again, stats from my WoodbridgeSuffolk.info site for 2006.
Those using the older browsers can still see most of the content, it just doesn't always present it in quite the way it was designed. Should I design to Netscape, or worry about Mac users with Safari? to reach another 3% 'perfectly'?

Recommendation:
Do not spend a disproportionate amount of time designing for old browsers, or new browsers that will NEVER gain significant market share. The fact that 'Opera' is good doesn't mean it will ever gain significant market share.  Even the reputedly 'very popular' Firefox still only holds less than 10% Remember the Betamax/VHS battle over video tape standard...

 

Design for all operating systems?

The following are statistics from my WoodbridgeSuffolk.info site for 2006

Windows 95.35%
Macintosh 4.33%
Linux 0.22%
 (unknown) 0.08%
SunOS 0.02%

Yes, Windows was allegedly "stolen" by Microsoft, and Windows/Intel machines are considered to be not as good as a Mac (and doubtless there is evidence!) and Macs are great for media, graphic and web designers.  But the point is, not many Mac users visit MY website. And the much-hyped Linux showed 115 VISITORS out of 51,000.
I'm not saying you should disenfranchise Mac users or Linux bigots but...

Recommendation:
Do not spend a disproportionate amount of time designing for non-Windows computers, unless a significant proportion of YOUR target audience use another OS. e.g. if you're selling to graphics designers, Mac users may be the majority.

 

Design for 800x600 screen resolution?

This is one area where the facts seem to support the usual advice.

1024x768

54.78%

800x600

17.13%

1280x1024

13.46%

1280x800

4.82%

1152x864

3.03%

1440x900

1.52%

1280x768

0.85%

1680x1050

0.78%

1400x1050

0.64%

1280x960

0.57%

That's 100% using 800x600 or better.
In this case, designing for 800x600 will not usually cause a problem for the 83% who are using higher resolution.  However, designing for 1024 would cause 17% of the audience to have unnecessary and irritating horizontal scrolling.

Recommendation:
Design for 800x600 - but 1024x768 is looking good for the near future...

 

Design for 16 million colour saturation?

32-bit 84.16%
16-bit 12.15%
24-bit 3.26%
8-bit 0.38%
1-bit 0.04%
4-bit 0.00%

The lower colour saturation does more than just give a worse colour rendition.   Because it cannot resolve the gradation of colour on, say, skin tones, it gives the impression of a grainy or even stripy picture.
If you use 16 million colours, 84% can see images at the quality you produced and 16% see the best image they are able to!

Recommendation:
Use 16 million colours to satisfy those who can see them, if your computer has the capability! Do not downgrade your images for those who can't - they see true-colour images just as well as they can see a lower-saturated image.

 

Include JavaScript?

The following are 'global' statistics for visitors to ALL the websites that use TheCounter, for January 2005.

  • JavaScript enabled: 98.97%
  • JavaScript disabled 1.03%

Recommendation:
If you need or want to use JavaScript, it is likely that the vast majority of the audience WILL be able to see it or use it. Be aware that the 1% who can't or won't, just might be your most important visitors.

Promote your client site in every search engine? (full year sample 2006 http://WoodbridgeSuffolk.info)
  •  82.7% Google
  •    6.9% Yahoo
  •    4.0% MSN
  •    3.4% AOL
  •    1.9% Search
  •    1.0% Ask
  •    0.2% AltaVista

Common advice is "you must get your site into all the (3000+?) search engines." For my clients, I only register them with Google, and recommend THE CLIENT chooses a category and registers in Yahoo. However, being in multiple search engines may help Google "popularity" rating, even if the search engine placement does not, of itself, produce results.

Go Here for an alternative perception...