Agile & Accessible Web Communications
My archived presentation from the 2008 ACUI / NACAS conference. Click on the Scribd logo on the upper left of the frame to view the full-screen version.
My archived presentation from the 2008 ACUI / NACAS conference. Click on the Scribd logo on the upper left of the frame to view the full-screen version.

Next week, the University of Minnesota's Web Standards & Accessibility Workgroup will be discussing the mobile web experience and how to design / style / optimize for mobile users and their various devices.
We meet in 402 Walter Library. Meetings are open to the public, so we invite anyone who is interested to attend (no RSVP is necessary). Date and time: July 18, noon-1:30 p.m.
Related links:
Click on the Scribd logo on the upper left of the frame to view the full-screen version.
Or, maybe that's just a lot of light streaming in through the windows?
A photo of the planning committee, taken at the end of MinneWebCon, yesterday's incredibly-successful University of Minnesota web conference.
From left to right: Eric Eklund, me, Eric Meyer (our morning keynote presenter), Zach Johnson, Peter Fleck, and Dan Kunitz. On the committee, but not in the photo: Sara Hurley, Jesse Mullan, and Simin Hickman.
The Americans With Disability Act of 1990 (ADA) was written during a period when Internet communications were in their earliest stages of general adoption and use. Consequently, Congress established this legislation within the context of a physical and analog world. Since this time, however, the ADA has begun to be reinterpreted within the nonphysical and digital (or “cyberspace�) context of the Internet and World Wide Web.
The most significant case to directly address this issue in court is National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corporation (2006 and 2007). However, the case has not yet been heard by the court, so only the initial arguments, subsequent decisions not to dismiss the case, and relevant commentary on these initial stages of the suit are available for review.
Today's University CSS-Development & Web Standards monthly meeting was about microformats. We had great attendance (30+) and Laurie McGinley did a wonderful job of presenting.
Next month we're taking a break from our regular meeting schedule due to our new conference event MinneWebCon.
I'm part of the U's New Media Research Network, and today's research breakfast included an excellent presentation on YouTube by Julie Jones, PhD candidate. She characterized YouTube's presence and success as comprising a "media metropolis", a place that people visit much in the way that they visit a city like New York, where a large variety of activities, content types, and cultures are concentrated in one location and result in a vibrant community.
Yet, for all of its richness and size, YouTube is successful for three more simple reasons: it is easy to find, easy to share, and easy to participate in. Compare this to other sites or applications that are either not easy to find, share, or participate in, and their lack of popularity is not a surprise.
I look forward to keeping up with Jones as she continues her YouTube research, as it is in the category of "social media" that continues to interest me a great deal. And while I do not expect to design media that are as wildly successful as YouTube, I do want to model my project goals on similar criteria, as I believe they are the foundation for success in today's Social Web.
I just returned from an invigorating two days in San Diego, immersing myself in the latest social networking developments and talking to industry experts. My head is still reeling....it was a fabulous professional development experience. I also made a lot of valuable contacts for MinneWebCon, including securing O'Reilly as a co-sponsor.
I'll be writing more on what I learned soon...
Last week, one of my readings* in Internet Law was by Lawrence Lessig, who I learned is a leading scholar in the area of cyberlaw and, especially, evolving copyright law as it pertains to cyberspace. As part of his groundbreaking work, he founded the Center for Internet and Society at the Stanford Law School.
But as befits the quickly changing landscape of the Internet, today a colleague of mine mentioned that Lessig just gave his last lecture on the topic; he is refocusing his work on government corruption.
Fortunately for me, even with him bowing out of the Internet law arena, I still have more than a lifetime's worth of legal analyses to catch up on at the CIS website...not to mention at Lessig's blog.
* - The Law of the Horse: What Cyberlaw Might Teach. 113 Harvard Law Review, Rev. 501 (1999).
Since late 2007, I have been chairing the planning committee for a conference that will take place on April 14, 2008. To our knowledge, it is the University’s first conference of its kind: a full-day continuing education event that focuses on standards and best practices for Web design and accessibility.
This week we finalized most of the program details, got the online registration closer to its launch pad, and started posting some basic info to the Web. After the keynote presenter returns a signed contract, there will be a collective sigh of relief as we (hopefully!) watch registrations begin to pile up. Stay tuned here:
Thanks to my office for being the lead sponsor of this event, as well as to the Academic Health Center, College of Liberal Arts, Disability Services, Extension Service, Student Unions & Activities, and Office of Information Technology.
I have registered for a course this spring, Internet Law (JOUR 5552), taught in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication. I hope it covers accessibility as well as licensing / copyright issues, as we are still trying to determine what the risks are in this area...yet we know they are very real. It should be an interesting class.
Related:

The two web sites represented in the micro-graphic above have had my attention in recent weeks:
When I listen to discussions about branding at the University, they often tend to focus on visual concepts: graphic design, graphic standards, page templates, etc. And I do not disagree that these items are parts of a successful branding effort.
Today I received a marketing email about the above book, and reading about it reminded me that the primary focus of branding should not be on graphics but rather on emotions. An excerpt from the book review notes:
Web sites must be able to connect with people on a number of different emotional levels - - and to do so very quickly. I absolutely believe that if a Web site can establish a set of emotional states that are truly reflective of the particular brand, it can subsequently influence those emotions to reach a desired outcome.
Again, graphics obviously play a role in this emotional negotiation. But the many variables of the web experience--- accessibility, text, image (still and moving), video, audio, input/output--- are all very important considerations that can easily be pushed aside when too great of an importance is placed on what color is this pixel, and is it in the right location?
This week I'm attending Flashbelt, a web design conference in Minneapolis. It focuses primarily on Flash design and development, but there are so many other examples, lessons, and best practices to absorb during a conference like this that it ends up being a fabulous source for ideas and skills that I can implement—regardless of whether I use Flash as the design tool.
I'll report on specifics later!
Last evening I attended a screening of Helvetica, a documentary film about the typeface of the same name, at the Walker Art Center. It was fabulous at so many levels:
* - Last fall, I also attended the Eames Film Festival at DWR in Minneapolis, which was equally fun and educational.
Yesterday I attended a New Media Research Network presentation entitled Second Life, Second Body: Microethnographic Analysis of Nonverbal Communication in the Virtual Environment (try saying that ten times fast!). I don't know...I'm still a skeptic of Second Life, even though it has companies in it making money, bands playing concerts, etc.
(the graphic above shows 'HealthInfo Island')
I am particularly skeptical of Ms. Antonijevic's ability to study the body language of avatars. Other attendees clearly doubted this, too, and raised questions about how we could even know to what extent various users could manipulate their avatars' gestures, and how the entire interface issue limits what is really communicated. For example, real facial microgestures can be mere microseconds in length, and we are not consciously perceiving them but rather do this subconsciously. If realtime, realspace interactions are this subtle (and not even consciously controlled or perceived), wouldn't these meaningful gestures be entirely absent in Second Life? Or, when they are there, how do we know they are intentional versus accidental?
Is this a case where the research proposal was inherently flawed?
Yesterday I participated in the annual conference of the University's Communicators Forum. Some notes from the sessions I attended:
This month I completed the Center for Human Resource Development's Keys to Supervision training program. I thought it was a fabulous program; I hope it makes me a fabulous supervisor!