CSS3 Rocks! Please use latest browser version.
Welcome to Walter Moore Canada's Blog. These comments are strictly opinion. You can disagree!
Showing posts with label Standards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Standards. Show all posts

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Escalation



Published 2003-03-31

Just ranting about escalation….
The objective of escalation is to bring something into higher priority and focus resources. In small business escalation is not usually an issue, there are usually only a few people to inform and everyone knows everybody. In enterprise class systems escalation becomes much more complex. Escalation is usually associated with problems but not necessarily(you can escalate good news). There are 2 sides… the escalator(person escalating a problem) and escalatee(person problem is being escalated to for investigation). 
When talking about problem escalation I find many enterprises lacking. Some have done wonderful jobs but most need work. Many shops have binders with contact lists, memos and hand written notes. Half the time is spent contacting the wrong people and often required contacts are never made. Other shops have rigid rules for escalation that often create excessive escalation. One shop I worked for used memos that would say something like…
If you have problems…
    Call 416-999-2222 Sun-Thu between 11pm-7am. No more than 4 rings!
    Call 705-555-1212 on the weekend
    Call 416-555-2244 at all other times.
I am unavailable Mon-Fri from 6-7pm, I will call you back after 7pm if paged.    

That was just the first level support contact, then you had to contact business and suppliers that each had their own escalation… And people were wondering why escalation took 90+ minutes at times.
Escalation needs clear guidelines – Rules are inherently inflexible and escalation requires extreme flexibility. Even if your internal escalation is rigid you have no control over external escalation.
Escalation Intervals – How long do you wait for support to call back? How long do you give first level support before escalating to second level? You need an escalation matrix that considers priority and impact. Example: Critical problems need faster escalation than others.
Does the problem need escalation? Some businesses escalate everything immediately. Although this may sound good it easily creates problems. An impact assessment should be completed before escalation is implemented. Perhaps the problem can wait to avoid costs like over-time. Others only escalate when everything crashes around them.
Once it is determined a problem should be escalated the escalation process should have structure to provide 1st, 2nd,3rd… level contacts for customer, internal support and suppliers but allow flexibility to “skip levels” as needed. Often internal support escalation is handled correctly but the ball is dropped when contacting customers and suppliers. How many times have you missed informing the right people? The escalation process must ensure ALL related contacts are informed.
Don’t call Jim “because he knows the solution”. Call the appropriate support and inform them that Jim has the solution. This ensures that bugs are worked out quickly… no one wants to be called at 3am. Another common problem for effective escalation. If you call Jim and bypass the escalation process the real issue of having the wrong contact never gets addressed. Next week(or day) Jim will get called again. Jim is probably not going to be very happy. Escalators must follow escalation as defined to ensure bugs in the process are addressed.
Escalation process should allow a flexible contact solution. Requiring specific contact types(like pager) are limiting and should be avoided. The contact person should have the ability to maintain how they are to be contacted(home,pager,cell…) but the process should not attempt to support memos like noted above.  Since contacts have the ability to maintain their contact details they assume the responsibility for the information.
Escalation requires constant reviewing to ensure the appropriate contacts are defined. Some companies think that once their escalation is defined they are done. Wrong! Escalation constantly needs fine tuning. I have seen many great systems fail because the data became outdated. A distributed ownership model is critical to a successful implementation. Contacts own their personal information, management owns the resources. Each is responsible to ensure their data is accurate.
Escalation requires ownership/responsibility. One of the most frequent problems I have seen is the lack of ownership when problems arise. A clear path to ownership must be maintained. Owners are responsible for the resource, they didn’t buy it! Ownership ensures at least someone is prioritizing the issue… they may not be the ones to do the work.
Escalation process must be accessible from various platforms(mainframe, PC, server, PDA…). No use having a great system that escalators can’t access. In addition it needs an API to integrate with standard business management tools like problem management.
I can go on and on about this subject… I think you get the idea so I will stop now.

XHTML



Updated 2009-11-25
Most development software now codes XHTML compliant tags. There are many smart phones that require XHTML to display properly. Welcome to the XML world. Was it really that bad? Now get ready for CSS3 and DHTML5.0.

Published 2003-03-31

XHTML is the evolution of HTML. The concept is simple… Make HTML documents into an XML compliant document.
Why should I convert?
XHTML is the “new” HTML and many new devices require compliance. XHTML applies strict rules which enforces standards. XHTML can be used as XML. The only choice you have is when… this is inevitable.
Why not?
If you only intend to support PC type platforms with standard browsers there is no value in converting. Every page in your site will have to be converted with no visible improvements… How do you justify the costs. You may be able to wait until your web development tool automatically generates XHTML compliant code. If you do not intend to support PDA/Phones there is no reason to convert.
Problems….
Virtually all web tools at the moment write standard HTML. After converting documents all future HTML edits will have to be reviewed for XHTML compliance manually until your tools write XHTML. In XHTML ALL tags must have a closing tag(
must have
). In XHTML tags that do not have closing tags must end with a “/” symbol(
must be
). This includes meta tags as well..
Even if you are diligent and always provide closing tags in your HTML you will have to do many adjustments. All tables must have a TBODY tag. All tags and properties must be in lowercase. Inline CSS & Script encapsulated in comments must be in a CDATA block. These are just some of the more common issues. If you use strict XHTML, style properties only exist in CSS and will require even more adjustments. I recommend you review W3C standards for XHTML at http://www.w3c.org/
How to Convert
There is a lot more than most people think to convert DHTML to XHTML but I have found some good cheats…
There are several tools out there that will automatically convert DHTML to XHTML. I strongly recommend you use these rather than manually adjusting your HTML. You can convert the core site pages immediately then convert the rest as time permits. For tools you can use http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/tidy that provides an online solution or you can download WebMatrix from http://www.asp.net/. I think Tidy provides the best implementation. There is a version of Tidy you can download and run from your PC… look on W3C site.
No matter what you decide, start writing all new documents with XHTML standards. It will save you having to re-write them later. That said you might notice this document is NOT XHTML compliant. I intend to convert  the entire demo site at one time so I am waiting till then… ;-)

Flash 5.0



2009-11-25
I never did get back to this and spent little time with developing Flash. It is still very popular particularly for ads and media companies. I may review the newest version to see what has changed in 10 years.

2000-10-07
I have recently been playing with Flash 5. I am not sure yet whether I love it or hate it(probably somewhere in between). Either way I am going to start to use it. Please note since I am just starting with Flash 5 some information may be inaccurate.

What is it?

In a nutshell it is an animation software and player. The player is “built in” to virtually all new browsers. It has been extended beyond that to interface with other HTML components(like JavaScript/Java…). It’s three biggest advantages are browser independence, animation, and vector graphics. If used properly it can produce a very efficient and pleasing site.

What I like

  1. Browser independence. No special code for Netscape or IE. Both browsers support Flash and newer browser versions come with Flash preinstalled. 
  2. Object Oriented. Instancing can really improve your sites performance while giving you cool effects.
  3. Animation. Need I say more. There is lot’s of it. Too bad it doesn’t support 3D(yet). Then it would be even more interesting. 
  4. Timelines. Match up that music to the animation, create object instances each with their own timeline.
  5. Vector graphics. Extremely efficient graphics method. Flash 5 allows some very nice effects.
  6. Single file with at least basic protection of developers code.

What I don’t like

  1. Coding view. You can only see the code for a specific object at anyone time. Would be nice to have option to see code for entire layer/scene. 
  2. Proprietary coding standards. There are so many it isn’t funny. 
  3. Abuse. Some people make Flash pages that are 1meg+ in size. Eventually this will be fine but right now this is abusive. 
  4. Not fully robust yet. It is getting there but working “outside the box” can get tricky.  
I still have to get used to the interface and how it works. The flash tutorial and samples are invaluable for newbies. There is no question Flash 5 has a place in most web sites. Even to a point of being the entire website. There will soon be an entire section for Flash at this site. Many written by an affiliate that is a much better graphics/Flash person than I.

Title Parameter



Updated 209-11-24
Notice no one uses the status bar for help anymore. It used to be used on almost every site. Everyone now uses the Title parameer or new custom modules that perform these yellow popups allowing very complex displays rather than the simplistic text display available with the Title parameter…some even look like the classic “balloon help”.  I suspect that these more advanced help module concepts will eventally make it into HTML standards(maybe reference a section of the page like a DIV or snippet of code as the title parm). I have been noticing that sometimes the help flashes on/off when movong over plain text that is in a SPAN with a title parameter. Quite frustrating.

Published 2000-09-02

The title parm is now available in both IE3+ and NN6+. What is it for? It provides those little pop-up help tips when you move the mouse over something. In previous NN browsers this was only available for pictures(Alt parm). This help is now available on ANY tag. For example, move your mouse over this text. Notice the pop-up help appears. Move the mouse over IE3+ or NN6+ to get a better idea of a more common usage. Another reason I supported NN6.
Title is what help should be. None of this writing to statusbar. Clients do not have to look anywhere, help hits them over the head. I had created a Form 7 process for IE3(only) that did the exact same thing before this was built in. This site is changing to exclusively Title help.
How do you do it? Simple, just put TITLE=”What you want to say” on virtually any tag.
I have more stuff on this in How To demos at my website.

IFrames... What Frames Should Have Been



Updated 2009-11-25
Iframes are everywhere now. Unfortunately they are being abused by advertisers. They are still a great solution and have provided me with numerous benefits. Still no autosizing capabilities ;(

Updated 2002-01-07

My demonstration site uses IFrames exclusively. Without them there would be no “FloatAway” toolbar. Now if they only had an automatic resizing and true transparency… Never satisfied ;-)

Published 2000-09-02

Ever use a frames design? Restrictive aren’t they? You can’t have a frame anywhere you want. A frameset document is a particular type of document. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a frame anywhere you wanted in a window. Wouldn’t it be nice to have frames that can be moved around the window at will? That is what IFrames improves on the old frames(among other things).
The biggest drawback with using IFrames was that they were only supported on IE3+. Not anymore. Netscape V6 now supports them. It is not quite as complete as IE’s version but still it is a major step forward.
Their biggest advantage is they allow a developer to create a site with multiple small windows interacting…just like many Windows applications. This is really cool and opens up the potential for a true client server model on the web.
Don’t get me wrong, frames are great. This demo site still uses frames because when making a simple 3 frame page the Frameset means you do not have to code for resizing and other weird things. I could have used IFrames, but they are not best for this particular site. I do use them on sites that need more complex interaction between many frames.
If you have a choice and you only need to support IE and NN6 think about IFrames. There are a lot more possibilities once you use them.

PC-NC-Mac Which is best?



Updated 2009-11-24 originally published 1997-09-25
Well many people now have higher than 1.5mbs connections and guess what… Network Computers(NC) are getting attention again. With the explosion of the Internet NC’s are becoming very viable. With Google going after Microsoft this could get very interesting. NC’s could come into favor much quicker with Google’s assistance. Many applications are already either 100% web based or have extensive interfacing with the web. A conversion of 90% of users could happen within 10 years due to the much cheaper systems and advantages of computing anywhere.
As for PC-MAC comparison… looks like many people are going to MAC’s to avoid so many viruses and attacks. Microsoft is still dominant but has lost share to Mac. These two have bigger issues than each other… Smart phones have become the choice of younger surfers. These new devices are chewing up both PC & MAC market share.
Updated 1997-11-01
Which is best? A delicate question. Depending on requirements.
NC’s(Network Computers) taken as a concept should be adopted by business wherever possible. All applications should reside on central servers. As a physical computing unit NC’s have a limited focus right now. They are great for appliances like the WebTV, specific business functions that do not require intense data processing(like data entry), and others. The big advantage is in the concept not the physical unit. The concept will reduce cost of ownership dramatically for the business if applied correctly.
PC’s(including MAC) are going to be around for a long time. Personally I don’t have confidence in bandwidth to download my operating system every time I start the computer. PC’s also allow intensive applications like CorelDraw to run without problems. Business has already tried to implement the NC concept with only applications but with limited bandwidth most have found it unacceptable. I expect eventually when everyone has 1.5mbps connections and the Internet supports the required speed NC’s will become more of a reality. If you only want to surf the Web an NC is the way to go(cheap). Otherwise I would stick to the PC.
For PC Vs MAC, previous to Windows 95 I ran the following rule….PC’s are for those that want to know about computers, Mac’s are for those that don’t. That said, Windows 95 interface has really changed this. Both are now easy to use and each has it’s advantages. Apple’s MAC has very good quality hardware components(much better than most PC’s). MAC unfortunately has limited, expensive software.

What Standard Platform?



Updated 2010-01-21
I have had time to try out 5 of the current top browsers and compare them in several aspects. Chrome & Safari are best. For developers/designers I think Safari wins, for basic users Chrome wins. Firefox comes in a very close 3rd. Opera is the "cool" toy of the bunch especially the voice component but it's CSS3 seams to be quirky. Finally IE8 which has fallen drastically from first to last n a few years. With the release of CSS3 Chrome, Safari and Netscape really rock. IE9 is going to support CSS3 but that will be a few months away. This blog has been customized specifically to take advantage of CSS3. There are numerous nice styling features you will not see if you are not using one of the top 3 browsers. One of the CSS3 features that could really help out display issues is the multi-column layout. It will allow applying different layouts very easily to accommodate displaying the same page on numerous different interfaces(something like having multiple XSLT files for one XML file but XSLT used html code where this is all within very simple CSS structures). The next few years should be very interesting... I expect Opera's voice interface(or similar) to become the rage. It actually works pretty good.

Updated 2009-10-27
We have new versions of all browsers, operating systems and just about everything else. Unfortunately we are in more mess than ever. Firefox(Netscape) has gained alot of ground but the real changes are the 3G mobile devices like iPhones. They mostly have their own version of some browser that simulates another browser ;( and they can rotate the screen. Screen sizes have gone crazy. Anything from 120X120px past 4120×3096px and new wide screens are everywhere. Even Mac’s are becoming more popular(about time).
If you want to talk about development platforms that is a whole other discussion.
The standard Computer web user….Current

  • Microsoft Windows(89%), Linux/Macintosh (11%)
  • Internet Explorer(40%+), FireFox(47%+), Other (13%+)
    • CSS
    • XML
    • DHTML
    • JavaScript

  • Supports 24 or 32 bits(display 16,777,216 different colors).(95%+)
  • Has at least 1024×768 screen resolution(87%+).
  • Has at least High Speed(80%+)

Updated 2001-06-08-merged from Standard User
We still have a lot of difficulties in web development but at least some of the issues have been
resolved on the PC client front. We will never have a 100% standard. This is
about as close as it gets. Of course other interfaces like WAP create a whole
new temporary issue(until 3G round 2).
The standard web user….

  • Microsoft Windows (95%+)
  • Internet Explorer Version 4.0+ (86%+)
    • CSS
    • XML
    • DHTML
    • JavaScript/VBScript

  • Supports high quality graphics(93%+)
  • Has at least 800×600 screen resolution(90%+).
  • Has at least 56kbs modem(82%+)
These stats are based on users that saw banner ads on millions of US sites.
You may have a site that caters to other configurations but anytime you have
better than 80% following the same standard it makes business sense to adopt
it.
On a future note the adoption of broadband access is growing very fast
where it is available. Eventually interactive video will become the standard
and we will be on to a totally different client interface.

Published 1997-09-25
Ya, right. Anyone that thinks that is dreaming. If you want to create an absolute minimal
page then it should work on any browser, but as soon as you want to do anything
cool you are into specific browser issues. It is now to a point that for a developer you
have to consider three browsers(Netscape®, Microsoft®, others)
with Microsoft® and Netscape® each having several versions that
all support different functions. Then you have to think about the different operating
systems like MAC, OS/2, Unix and Microsoft® Windows V***, again each with
their own supported functions for each browser.
What are the users settings? Do they have JavaScript enabled? What if they specify their
own fonts, background or other options?
After all that you still have to worry about screen resolution and browser window size.
My old site at one time had three views(one for each browser). In each view there was code
required to handle different operating systems and versions of each browser. Without this
I couldn’t show many functions available to the specific browser. I have now enhanced this
site to demonstrate IE version 4.
As for JAVA? Most companies making development tools(Symantec®, Microsoft®,
etc.) have added functions only available on a specific platform. Unfortunately without
these added functions JAVA is limited to the “sandbox”.
So what was that about standard platform????? Ya right.