thingsinjars

  • 15 Jan 2010

    User style

    A few years ago, I made a prediction about the way the web was going and so far it hasn't come true but it's definitely coming closer. To me it seems that the logical extension of us developers separating style and substance – what we've been doing for years with semantic mark-up – is for the general consumer to take that substance and give it their own style. I'm in no way suggesting that everyone become a designer. That would be a terrible, terrible thing. What I mean is that the consumer takes in/reads/experiences whatever it is you're giving to them in the manner that best suits them. There are many examples of what I mean around already but they're still not quite where I think they will end up.

    RSS

    We (web developers) already provide RSS feeds on our sites. By subscribing to a site's RSS feed, you get the content delivered directly to your RSS reader. As long as the site is providing the full article content (shame on you, if not) the consumer gets to see your content in a design format you have little control over. There is a basic level allowed for RSS formatting but nothing you can rely on. The control for the visual appearance of your content is now in the hands of the designer of the reader and the consumer (by way of choosing which reader they use).

    userstyle.css

    This was what initially prompted my thoughts on the subject. I've used Opera as my main browser for almost 10 years and I've always liked the Author mode/User mode switch. In essence, you can quickly toggle between seeing a web page as it was intended by the designer or disregarding the original layout and applying your own stylesheets to it. For the most part, this is used to be able to set high contrast for visually impaired users or to test various criteria (showing only images that have missing alt attributes, for example) but they can be used to produce any visual effect achievable with CSS.

    User stylesheets can also be assigned on a per-site basis rather than globally which means that you could have your Google results rendered in courier, right-aligned in green on black while your facebook pages can be set in Times in a sepia colourscheme.

    As with many things on the web, userstyles became a lot more popular once this functionality was available in Firefox (via the add-on Stylish) and not just Opera. Now there's a growing community of Userstyle developers and a directory of styles. Unfortunately, this is still not quite ready for mainstream use. It requires at least a basic level of technical ability to enable userstyles and to install them.

    userscript.js

    The userstyles community is, however, dwarfed in comparison to the userscript community. In pretty much exactly the same way that userstyles work, users can execute a specific Javascript file whenever they visit a site. Again, this can be enabled in Opera using site preferences and in Firefox using the Greasemonkey add-on. These scripts can completely change the way a site functions as well as how it looks. Combine them with userstyles (which userscripts can include automatically) and the only thing you can rely on remaining from your original design is the URL. There's a massive database of userscripts available.

    Again, though, these are still just that little bit too hard. The standard user isn't going to install the extension, isn't going to browse for scripts and isn't going to run Opera so these are still a bit too far away.

    Grab now, read later

    There are now quite a few sites where you can save stuff to read later. If you find an interesting article or a funny blog post but don't have time to read it or if it appears on a site with a garish and unusable design, you can send it to Instapaper or Evernote . You can then read it in their interface, on your iPhone, on your Kindle... all separated from your design.

    It's not only text that gets this treatment, you can use Ember and LittleSnapper to grab and store visuals for later perusal or use Huffduffer to collect any audio files you find and serve them back to you as your very own personalised podcast. Again, this is your content separated entirely from the way you wanted it seen. And that's a good thing.

    For content creators, all this means is that your content can be consumed anywhere, even via sites, tools and delivery mechnisms you've never heard of. Designers, don't despair, users aren't suddenly going to take their content elsewhere and not need you any more – users still want and need things designed well, this just means that if your design works for the user for a particular type of content, they'll use it for any content of that type. I'd much rather watch youtube videos using vimeo's layout than youtube's. Actually, I'd much rather have vimeo's comments, too.

    We're still quite a way off the average user being able to see whatever they want however they want it but these technologies and tools are definitely heading that way. I just wish I'd made a bet on it way back when.

    Opinion

  • 10 Dec 2009

    Side Tab

    • thumb of my Opera layout

    After reading Aza Raskin's post about Firefox moving its tabs down the side of the window, I decided to give it a go in Opera. It turns out to be very useful when you have a widescreen monitor. I usually end up with several dozen tabs open at once and it's much easier to be able to put them down the side in an area which is, for most websites at least, dead space. On the rare occasions I do find myself on a website which requires more than the 1470px horizontal space this gives me, I can just tap f4 and get my full 1650px back. As the window sidepanel also groups by window and lists all tabs open across all windows, I can keep them ordered thematically, too.

    This arrangement definitely doesn't work, however, when you have a small screen. When I tried this on my netbook, I had to choose between losing half of my screen to the tab list or only being able to read the beginning of each page title, even if I only had one tab open.

    A quick aside, when I first read about moving tabs down the side, my initial thought was "It's a shame Opera doesn't have add-ons, I'd like to give this a go" and very nearly fired up Firefox before I realised that Opera already has this functionality and has had since (approximately) version 5 (almost 10 years ago). Just sayin'.

    Geek, Opinion, Design

  • 25 Oct 2009

    It's not difficult, don't make it difficult

    What's easier? Boiling a single potato, letting it cool, mashing it using a toothpick then repeating with a different potato until you have a plateful of mashed potato...

    or

    Boiling all the potatoes you need at once then mashing them together with a potato masher?

    Okay, choose between one of these methods of determining whether the bathroom light is on: Draw up a list of people who have visited your house recently. Interview them to build a data set of all rooms visited and by whom. Re-interview those who visited the bathroom. Determine a timeline of bathroom visits and light switch position on entry and on exit. Analyse the data to find the last visitor to the bathroom and the position of the light switch. Examine the electrical connections between the light switch and the light bulb to determine what the current status of the light itself might be.

    or

    Go look.

    How are you doing on the quiz so far? Okay. So, final question: What's easier? Building a convoluted web site using proprietary code, conflicting CSS requiring you to target everything with !important, making all interaction rely on JavaScript for even the most basic functionality, fighting between form and function so much that you end up having a website that only works occasionally and even then only works for a subset of the available users.

    or

    Building a straightforward website using nothing but standard mark-up, styles which cascade in a predictable fashion and enhancing already-working functionality with a dash of JavaScript to make people go 'Ooh, shiny'?

    If you thought the second option was easier, I'm sorry, you would appear to be wrong. At least, that's the impression I get every single day while wandering round the internet. It must be really easy to make a ham-fisted, in-bred, should be kept in the basement monstrous-crime-against-nature abomination of a website because otherwise, people wouldn't do it so much.

    I've used Opera as my main browser for almost 10 years now and I've lost count of the number of times I've been faced with a message apologising to me because it appears my browser is out of date. If I could just update my browser to Internet Explorer 5, I could enjoy their site. Seriously, it must be a lot easier to make a web page locking me out of the site than not to. It must be a matter of a few seconds work to write browser-sniffing scripts and learn all the proprietary foibles of IE whereas not writing that script must take hours and not learning bad habits must take years.

    I have some ability to forgive those websites which are obviously the work of someone whose passion is something else. If I'm looking at a site where a guy has meticulously documented the different ways different cats react to different balls of yarn, I'm guessing his interests is in yarn. Or cats. Or the combination thereof. He's not necessarily going to know the best way to make a website. I find it much harder, however, forgive big companies. Either those with an in-house web staff or those who contract agencies. Whatever way they do it, someone is getting paid to make the website. It is someone's job to write code.

    I've always been of the opinion that if you're going to do any thing, you should at least try to do it as well as it can possibly be done. It doesn't matter if you're playing piano, rowing, juggling chickens or making a website, you have no excuse for not at least trying to be awesome at it. If you end up being awesome at it: great! You're the world's best chicken juggler, go into the world knowing that and be happy. If you don't: great! You gave it a darn good try and you probably ended up pretty good, at least. Maybe try juggling cats next time. I have a hard enough time getting my head around the idea that not everybody follows this same level of obsession in their interests but to have people who are actually getting paid actual money to do something (in this case, making a website, not chicken juggling) and who feel it's okay to be 'okay' is a concept I have great difficulty understanding.

    Okay, impassioned rant over. I'm not going to name any sites. Just consider this a warning, Internet.

    Opinion, Geek

  • newer posts

Categories

Toys, Guides, Opinion, Geek, Non-geek, Development, Design, CSS, JS, Open-source Ideas, Cartoons, Photos

Shop

Colourful clothes for colourful kids

I'm currently reading

Projects

  • Awsm Street – Kid's clothing
  • Stickture
  • Explanating
  • Open Source Snacks
  • My life in sans-serif
  • My life in monospace
Simon Madine (thingsinjars)

@thingsinjars.com

Hi, I’m Simon Madine and I make music, write books and code.

I’m the Engineering Lead for komment.

© 2025 Simon Madine