| Bill Sawyer | |||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| This is my webpage. Actually, it isn't. It is a quickly constructed page that I can use to provide Ian Lloyd with a place to link to a response I wrote. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Links: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Webstandards | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| W3C | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Useit | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Techie looking picture ... impressed yet? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Java | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Contact Info: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| Name: | Bill Sawyer | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| Email: | [email protected] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Ian Llloyd wrote a critique of Vincent Flander's article on Web Pages that Suck. While I agree with Ian, I think he missed Vincent's biggest error, his analogy Vincent wrote: Remember, nobody gets excited about the tools used to build a house ("Please tell me what brand of hammers you used!") People get excited about how the house looks and performs. Web standards are not tools. They are the building blocks of the web. Now, let me assure you, people do get excited about the materials that go into their house. Just ask all the people who've spent big bucks to buy solid-surface countertops (like Corian (tm)) over traditional countertop laminates (like Formica (tm)). Web standards are materials worth paying extra. You could also ask those who've built houses with materials that haven't stood the test of time. Talk to people with ABS Pipes or Masonite Siding. The companies who manufactured these products have paid tremendous costs in legal fees, settlement costs, and bad PR. Ironically, in comparison, those companies who are building web sites not based on standards are risking even higher costs. Vincent's contention that web standards are often proposed by hucksters, of a sort, looking to make a buck by proposing such sites also misses another point. There are an equal number of hucksters proposing web sites that don't adhere to standards. In the long run, if I have to pay for standards or not, I think I'd rather pay for the higher quality materials of standards compliance. Ironically, in the same article, Vincent refers to an interview wiith Jared Spool. In that interview, Jared Spool said: Instead, when we're in front of executives, we quickly learned to talk about only five things: 1. How do we increase revenue? 2. How do we reduce expenses? 3. How do we bring in more customers? 4. How do we get more business out of each customer? 5. How do we increase shareholder value? While I have no basis for making a judgement of Mr. Spool's business acumen, I can state that he and Mr. Flander are missing obvious points. 1. Web standards increase revenue by allowing more customers to access the site regardless of their browser. 2. Web standards reduce costs by simplifying code written and maintained. Maintenance costs are always far higher than initial development costs over the life of a web site. 3. Web standards bring in more customers by excluding no customers. 4. Web standards allow you to get more out of each customer by giving those customers more ways to reach your site (e.g., browsers, cell phones, PDAs, text-only browsers, etc.) 5. Web standards benefit all of the above; so, shareholder value is increased as a natural result. Web standards aren't just toys or tricks of the trade. They are viable construction material choices that demonstrate the skill and aptitude of the craftspeople who choose to construct web sites using them. Best Regards, Bill Sawyer |
|||||||||||||||||||||||