Most Moderate of News: Bloomberg & NY1

clip_image001Accessibility is the measure of how many differently skilled/abled types of people (including individuals with disabilities) in varying locations (e.g. mobile web) can make use of a given product. There exist many, very thorough, guidelines for determining the degree to which a product adheres to accepted accessibility standards. However, many can be very complex and time-consuming, also requiring the study of a good deal of the underlying code — much of which goes against the goals of the ‘quick’ part of Quick-UX.

Quick-UX

Quick-UX provides for the rapid, simple and quantifiable assessment of a product’s User Experience (UX). In answering the question of Usability, "Should I use it?" the sub-category of Accessibility represents one of the more complex components.

Today, we will look at the remaining 2 of the 3 examples of products with Moderate Accessibility: a Quick-UX Accessibility value between 0.4 (inclusive) and 0.6.

Moderate Accessibility

For this set of products, I chose ones that either encouraged or required reading as the primary function of the product. A category that begs for a clear attention to the Accessibility needs of their varied user bases.

Example: Bloomberg

Bloomberg’s web product is geared towards the presenting of top headlines and news within a variety of categories.

00_bloomberg_homepage

The Bloomberg product is the highest scoring product within the set of products of Moderate Accessibility…

01_bloomberg_results

… receiving an Accessibility variable value of 0.596.

Should Do

Text Equivalents

  • As is common to many products, here too, it is equally important to provide ALT text in association with the image it is describing.
  • Replace all “Decorative Images” containing empty ALT attributes (e.g. ALT=””) with CSS-based solutions. Images that exist to contribute content to the page should contain a descriptive, non-empty, ALT attribute.

Example: NY1

Like Bloomberg, the NY1 product exists to present and make news convenient for its visitors.

00_ny1_homepage

NY1 revealed the following results from FAE…

01_ny1_results

And, with Accessibility variable value of 0.58, also earned its place within the level of Moderate Accessibility.

Should Do

Styling

  • As is common to many products, here too, it is equally important to provide ALT text in association with the image it is describing.
  • NY1 would be well served to use neither the <b> nor <i> elements. They are an indication of font-type and provide no contextual meaning. In these cases, the use of stylized header tags (<H#>) or <strong> or <em> would be better suited.
  • Separating the presentation from the functional layers is also important, not just to the development process, but also to Accessibility. The use of <font>, <center>, and other inline styling, like…

02_ny1_inline_style

… should be moved to the product’s CSS.

Quick & Usable

Over the next few weeks I will continue exploring the ins-and-outs of a variety of products, and walking through real-world examples of the Quick-UX evaluation of Accessibility

Comprehensive Accessibility [RoundHouse & FAE]
Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility [UseIt & Eboy]
Moderate Accessibility [Borders, Bloomberg & NY1]
Fair Accessibility
Poor Accessibility

Quick-UX Accessibility Summary, Charts & Data

Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring the Usefulness and Credibility components of Quick-UX, the quick and easy method of generating quantifiable and comparable metrics representing the understanding of the overall User Experience of a product, as well as other insightful posts from The Product Guy.

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Bordering on Mediocrity

clip_image001Accessibility is the measure of how many differently skilled/abled types of people (including individuals with disabilities) in varying locations (e.g. mobile web) can make use of a given product. There exist many, very thorough, guidelines for determining the degree to which a product adheres to accepted accessibility standards. However, many can be very complex and time-consuming, also requiring the study of a good deal of the underlying code — much of which goes against the goals of the ‘quick’ part of Quick-UX.

Quick-UX

Quick-UX provides for the rapid, simple and quantifiable assessment of a product’s User Experience (UX). In answering the question of Usability, "Should I use it?" the sub-category of Accessibility represents one of the more complex components.

Today, we will look at the first of 3 examples of products with Moderate Accessibility a Quick-UX Accessibility value between 0.4 (inclusive) and 0.6.

Moderate Accessibility

For this set of products, I chose ones that either encouraged or required reading as the primary function of the product. This is a category that begs for a clear attention to the Accessibility needs of their varied user bases.

Example: Borders

Here we look at Borders’ online product, a marketplace for the selling of books, music, movies, etc.

00_borders_homepage

Borders’ received the following results from FAE…

01_borders_results

…resulting in an Accessibility variable value of 0.428, Moderate Accessibility.

Should Do

Navigation & Orientation

  • Web pages should have only 1 title element, unlike that found, for example on some of the Borders’ pages.

02_borders_title

  • Make sure that when using <H#> tags on a page, there is always at least one <H1>. Since the <H1> tag is generally the page title, it is strongly discouraged to exceed the use of more than two (and penalized by FAE).
  • Insert text content, not merely an image with an ALT attribute, into the page headings like this one…

<h2><img src="/wcsstore/ConsumerDirectStorefrontAssetStore/images/content/logo_print.gif" alt="Borders logo" border="0" /></h2>

  • List elements should be clearly incorporated into that of the overall page hierarchy for clarity and navigation. Each list element that is part of the navigation region of the page should be preceded with an <H#> element.

03_borders_list

  • Each area element should have a redundant text link with matching href.
  • When it comes to images, it is always important to provide the image ALT or TITLE text – especially for those who cannot see it/them.

Quick & Usable

Over the next few weeks I will continue exploring the ins-and-outs of a variety of products, and walking through real-world examples of the Quick-UX evaluation of Accessibility

Comprehensive Accessibility [RoundHouse & FAE]
Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility [UseIt & Eboy]
Moderate Accessibility [Borders, Bloomberg & NY1]
Fair Accessibility
Poor Accessibility

Quick-UX Accessibility Summary, Charts & Data

Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring the Usefulness and Credibility components of Quick-UX, the quick and easy method of generating quantifiable and comparable metrics representing the understanding of the overall User Experience of a product, as well as other insightful posts from The Product Guy.

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Nearly, Like an Eboy

clip_image001Accessibility is the measure of how many differently skilled/abled types of people (including individuals with disabilities) in varying locations (e.g. mobile web) can make use of a given product. There exist many, very thorough, guidelines for determining the degree to which a product adheres to accepted accessibility standards. However, many can be very complex and time-consuming, also requiring the study of a good deal of the underlying code — much of which goes against the goals of the ‘quick’ part of Quick-UX.

Quick-UX

Quick-UX provides for the rapid, simple and quantifiable assessment of a product’s User Experience (UX). In answering the question of Usability, "Should I use it?" the sub-category of Accessibility represents one of the more complex components.

Today, we will look at the second of 2 examples of products with Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility, with a Quick-UX Accessibility value between 0.6 (inclusive) and 0.8.

Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility

Example: Eboy

The Eboy product is a presentation of design firm, Eboy Arts. Often, when it comes to web design, everything beyond the visual and interact is, well, beyond.

00_eboy_homepage

Here Eboy bucks the trend and provides impressive results, with an Accessibility variable value of 0.668, Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility.

01_eboy_results

Should Do

While the UseIt product’s areas of improvement lay in the realms of Navigation & Orientation and HTML Standards, Eboy’s efforts are best spent in their implementation of Scripting…

  • 02_eboy_mouseoverThe onfocus event should be used in conjunction with the onmouseover event.
  • When using the onmouseout event, the onblur event should also be defined.
  • The product’s user is best served by using CSS on elements that can be interacted with via keyboard, instead of attaching onmouseover and onmouseout events.

Quick & Usable

Over the next few weeks I will continue exploring the ins-and-outs of a variety of products, and walking through real-world examples of the Quick-UX evaluation of Accessibility

Comprehensive Accessibility [RoundHouse & FAE]
Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility [UseIt & Eboy]
Moderate Accessibility [Borders, Bloomberg & NY1]
Fair Accessibility
Poor Accessibility

Quick-UX Accessibility Summary, Charts & Data

Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring the Usefulness and Credibility components of Quick-UX, the quick and easy method of generating quantifiable and comparable metrics representing the understanding of the overall User Experience of a product, as well as other insightful posts from The Product Guy.

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Accessibly UseIt

clip_image001Accessibility is the measure of how many differently skilled/abled types of people (including individuals with disabilities) in varying locations (e.g. mobile web) can make use of a given product. There exist many, very thorough, guidelines for determining the degree to which a product adheres to accepted accessibility standards. However, many can be very complex and time-consuming, also requiring the study of a good deal of the underlying code — much of which goes against the goals of the ‘quick’ part of Quick-UX.

Quick-UX

Quick-UX provides for the rapid, simple and quantifiable assessment of a product’s User Experience (UX). In answering the question of Usability, "Should I use it?" the sub-category of Accessibility represents one of the more complex components.

Today, we will look at the first of 2 examples of products with Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility, with a Quick-UX Accessibility value between 0.6 (inclusive) and 0.8.

Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility

Example: UseIt.com

Another product I could not resist evaluating is that of the Usability guru himself, Jakob Nielsen. UseIt is a comprehensive source for all aspects of Usability, across all media. Let’s see just how comprehensively it is applied.

00_useit_homepage

UseIt received the following results from FAE…

01_useit_results

…producing an Accessibility variable value of 0.636, Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility.

Should Do

Navigation & Orientation

  • When using input elements…

type=text, password, checkbox, radio, file, select, textarea

… it is important to also use the label element with either (1) the for attribute to indicate which form element a label is bound to, or (2) a descriptive title attribute. For example, as demonstrated on w3schools…

02_useit_form_for_attr

HTML Standards

  • The doctype declaration should be the very first thing in an HTML document. And when it is used, it is important to remember that DOCTYPE is case-sensitive…

03_useit_doctype

Quick & Usable

Over the next few weeks I will continue exploring the ins-and-outs of a variety of products, and walking through real-world examples of the Quick-UX evaluation of Accessibility

Comprehensive Accessibility [RoundHouse & FAE]
Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility [UseIt & Eboy]
Moderate Accessibility [Borders, Bloomberg & NY1]
Fair Accessibility
Poor Accessibility

Quick-UX Accessibility Summary, Charts & Data

Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring the Usefulness and Credibility components of Quick-UX, the quick and easy method of generating quantifiable and comparable metrics representing the understanding of the overall User Experience of a product, as well as other insightful posts from The Product Guy.

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Well-Rounded Accessibility

clip_image001Accessibility is the measure of how many differently skilled/abled types of people (including individuals with disabilities) in varying locations (e.g. mobile web) can make use of a given product. There exist many, very thorough, guidelines for determining the degree to which a product adheres to accepted accessibility standards. However, many can be very complex and time-consuming, also requiring the study of a good deal of the underlying code — much of which goes against the goals of the ‘quick’ part of Quick-UX.

Quick-UX

Quick-UX provides for the rapid, simple and quantifiable assessment of a product’s User Experience (UX). In answering the question of Usability, "Should I use it?" the sub-category of Accessibility represents one of the more complex components.

Today, we will look at 2 examples of products with Comprehensive Accessibility, with Quick-UX Accessibility values above 0.8.

Comprehensive Accessibility

Example: RoundHouse

RoundHouse is a product focused on providing system administration support to other businesses. And it’s clear that their support goes beyond the server…

00_roundhouse

RoundHouse received the following results from FAE…

01_roundhouse-results

…resulting in an Accessibility variable value of 0.904, Comprehensive Accessibility.

Should Do

02_roundhouse-h1h3 The two products highlighted within this article for Comprehensive Accessibility have both done a great job with their Accessibility implementations. But, even within the RoundHouse product there is room for improvement.

Navigation & Orientation

  • When using <H#> tags on a page, they should go in-order, and not skip heading delineations for visually stylistic convenience.

    This was found to occur on numerous pages. In each of these cases, the content of the page goes from H1 directly to a series of H3’s – when a styled H2 would have been better, and clearer.

  • Be sure to always indicate the default language for the content of the webpage. For example,

<HTML lang=”en-us” …. >

Text Equivalents

  • Always specify informative ALT text for your images.

Styling

  • The <b> element is an indication of font-type, as opposed contextual meaning. Use <H#> tags or <strong> or <em> to better convey the underlying meaning of the content.

Example: Functional Accessibility Evaluator (FAE)

00_fae_homepage

It’s always fun to point out how the tool, itself responsible for the quick evaluation of all the products within the Quick-UX discussion of Accessibility, should be improved to also achieve a higher value.

01_fae_results

…resulting in an Accessibility variable value of 0.976, Comprehensive Accessibility.

Should Do

The portion of the product that could be improved, while minor, as it achieved the highest score, that would have the greatest impact upon the score’s improvement, would be to focus on HTML Standards.

HTML Standards

  • Specify every page’s content type. While typically implemented, there is a noticeable occasional absence of…

<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"/>

Quick & Usable

Over the next few weeks I will be exploring the ins-and-outs of a variety of products, and walking through real-world examples of the Quick-UX evaluation of Accessibility

Comprehensive Accessibility [RoundHouse & FAE]
Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility [UseIt & Eboy]
Moderate Accessibility [Borders, Bloomberg & NY1]
Fair Accessibility
Poor Accessibility

Quick-UX Accessibility Summary, Charts & Data

Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring the Usefulness and Credibility components of Quick-UX, the quick and easy method of generating quantifiable and comparable metrics representing the understanding of the overall User Experience of a product, as well as other insightful posts from The Product Guy.

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Evaluating Accessibility: The Quick-UX Way

clip_image001Accessibility is the measure of how many differently skilled/abled types of people (including individuals with disabilities) in varying locations (e.g. mobile web) can make use of a given product. There exist many, very thorough, guidelines for determining the degree to which a product adheres to accepted accessibility standards. However, many can be very complex and time-consuming, also requiring the study of a good deal of the underlying code — much of which goes against the goals of the ‘quick’ part of Quick-UX.

Quick-UX

Quick-UX provides for the rapid, simple and quantifiable assessment of a product’s User Experience (UX). In answering the question of Usability, "Should I use it?" the sub-category of Accessibility represents one of the more complex components.

In Parts

Greater Accessibility provides greater benefits to people both with and without disabilities, from equal opportunity to facilitating perception and navigation.

There are many factors that go into achieving Comprehensive Flexibility.

Navigation
Orientation
Alternate Text
Scripting Usage
CSS Implementation
HTML Standards
and more…

As there are many factors, there are also many techniques and frameworks for evaluating them:

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/

Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA)
http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/

User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG)
http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/

Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards (Section 508)
http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/standards.htm

Quantified

I use a robust (and free) proxy for quickly assessing a product’s Accessibility through the use of the Functional Accessibility Evaluator (FAE) link. The FAE’s resultant scores are averages which, in turn, are normalized to a range from zero to one to represent the value for Quick-UX‘s Accessibility variable.

01_fae_results

For a long time I used a simple normalizing of a product’s Passes, as determined by FAE, to a 0 – 1.0 scale. Over time websites have been improving due to the increased usage of templated languages, development libraries, and the improving skillsets of web developers. As a result, I found the need to shift my scale to more readily capture the increased quality and more clearly highlight the differences between the calculated Accessibility values.

The new equation I have been using to raise this bar on website Accessibility follows:

  1. Take the average of all 5 categories of FAE determined Passes. The result is X, the normalized Pass score, and falls between 0.0 and 1.0.
  2. Shift and expand the scale. The result is Y.
    • Y = 2X -1
  3. Finally, the Quick-UX Accessibility value, QUA, is bounded:
    • QUA = Y for Y ≥ 0
    • QUA = 0 for Y < 0

See the Quick-UX Worksheet for easy, automatic calculating of the QUA (and other Quick-UX variables).

Levels

Once quantified, a product falls into 1 of 5 levels that we will be exploring and discussing in the remainder of this series on Quick-UX Accessibility. They are:

  Comprehensive Accessibility QUA > 0.8
  Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility QUA > 0.6
  Moderate Accessibility QUA > 0.4
  Fair Accessibility QUA > 0.2
  Poor Accessibility QUA ≤ 0.2

Scope

For this discussion of Quick-UX Accessibility, I evaluated over 50 products and will be exploring a select subset in greater detail in the coming articles. The distribution of the evaluated products for this series can be seen in the following chart.

clip_image003

Quick & Usable

Over the next few weeks I will be exploring the ins-and-outs of a variety of products, and walking through real-world examples of the Quick-UX evaluation of Accessibility

Comprehensive Accessibility [RoundHouse & FAE]
Nearly Comprehensive Accessibility [UseIt & Eboy]
Moderate Accessibility [Borders, Bloomberg & NY1]
Fair Accessibility
Poor Accessibility

Quick-UX Accessibility Summary, Charts & Data

Subscribe now (click here) to make sure you don’t miss any part of this series exploring the Usefulness and Credibility components of Quick-UX, the quick and easy method of generating quantifiable and comparable metrics representing the understanding of the overall User Experience of a product, as well as other insightful posts from The Product Guy.

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Automating the Path to a Better User Experience

clip_image001

I started writing about Quick-UX in 2008. Since then, I have written many detailed articles exploring, evaluating, and identifying areas of improvement for real products — along the components that make up Quick-UX. Now, through the help of Google Docs, as I did the other week with the release of the Quick-MI Worksheet, I’m sharing the Quick-UX Worksheet to make it even easier and faster for you to apply Quick-UX to your products, track progress, and share the results with your team. The Quick-UX Worksheet automatically performs all the necessary calculations and summarizes the product’s Usability, Usefulness, and Desirability for you.

00_quickux_worksheet

About Quick-UX

Quick-UX evaluates the degree to which a product successfully addresses the following 3 questions:

The elements evaluated in response to each question constitute a minimal representative subset that accurately addresses the question posed while adhering to the goals of Quick-UX.

Often, a quick assessment of User eXperience is more aptly called for. A quick assessment allows for rapid compilation of simple heuristics that can be very handy in providing…

  • a summarized view of a product’s overall User eXperience,
  • directional guidance for a product’s future development, and/or
  • metrics for comparison with other products.

Quick-UX is a method that I have developed and refined over time and frequently utilize when quick assessments are best suited to the task. The method that I describe below is a great way to build a summary description with quantifiable and comparable metrics, representing the understanding of the overall User eXperience of a product.

Instructions

The Worksheet is broken into sections based on Category as indicated by the blue row starting each.

01_blow_rows

Beneath each Worksheet Category are the variables that make up the associated category.

02_variables

To the right of the Category variable names is the Description column providing quick guidance regarding how to quantify each variable. More detailed guidance and examples can be found within article series posted on The Product Guy.

03_descriptions

The next two columns “Select One” and “Select All that Apply” contain the variable values. When a variable has values listed within the “Select One” column, only the variable that best describes the current product’s characteristic is selected and copied, within the same row, to the Total Value column.

04_consistency

When a variable has values listed within the “Select All that Apply” column, each value whose Description matches the current product is mirrored into the Total Value column.

05_credibility

The Accessibility value is calculated differently than all the other variables. The value associated with the Accessibility variable comes from the normalized result of a 3rd party application. To obtain this value we use a robust (and free) proxy for quickly assessing a product’s Accessibility through the use of the Functional Accessibility Evaluator (fae) link. The fae’s resultant scores are averages which, in turn, are normalized to a range from zero to one to represent the value for Quick-UX‘s Accessibility variable.

06_fae

The Total Values associated with each Category will automatically update…

07_total_value

… as will the Quick-UX Rating at the bottom of the table.

08_bottom

Quick-UX Summary boils it all down into one single page, from each variable value to handy visual representations.

09_summary_fullscreen

I also find it handy to use for tracking product progress over time, as well as instantly overlaying against products.

As an additional note, the Quick-UX Worksheet is pre-populated with sample data to make it easier to dive in and get started. As you assess your products, just replace/add/remove the variable values within the Total Value column to match your findings. (Remember, only modified the Total Value entries within the non-blue rows — everything else will update automatically for you.)

VIEW THE QUICK-UX WORKSHEET

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy

Really Bad is MUCH Better than Nothing and Really Great Isn’t Much Better than Bad

01_luke Guest post by Luke Hohmann of Enthiosys.

Product Managers, Agile or otherwise, are asked to create a fair number of documents. Even when we’ve replaced our “Big” MRDs with vision Statements, Roadmaps, and Backlogs, most of us are still expected to clearly document:

  • Who we’re serving (e.g., target markets, market segments)
  • Why they care (e.g., benefits of product often expressed in ROI)
  • Why we care (e.g., market size, total available market, total addressable market, growth, and share)
  • How we’ll reach them (e.g., sales channels, partner structures)
  • Our sustainable competitive advantage
  • The competitive landscape
  • Personas
  • and… ???

My point is that even the most minimalistic approach to Product Management has a Product Manager creating a fairly large number of documents. Which doesn’t concern me, because these are quite sensible documents to create.

What does concern me is that I’ve seeing an increasing number of product managers who are avoiding creating these basic artifacts. The conversation goes something like this:

Luke: “Francesca, can you show me your personas?”
Francesca: “Oh yeah—personas. They’re really great. I like the cooper format, but I also think the format I learned from Pragmatic Marketing is really neat”.
Luke: “Yes, both formats are quite useful. I’ll be OK with either. Can you show me your personas?”
Francesca: “Well, you see, that’s the thing. We don’t have personas. You see, we really didn’t have all the time we wanted to create the persona format that we thought would be great. And since we couldn’t create a really great persona we decided just to skip it.”

Push the big red button labeled “STOP”.

Just because you can’t create a “really great” anything does not mean you should skip it.

Yes, I know. Writing a really great persona is hard. But a really great persona is merely better than a good persona. And a good persona (which looks “bad” in comparison to a really great persona) is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better than a bad persona. Logically:

“bad” Product Management deliverable >> NO deliverable

“really great” Product Management deliverable > “good” Product Management deliverable

To help get you started, I hereby proclaim that creating “bad” deliverables is OK. Specifically:

  • It is OK to have a persona without just the right picture.
  • It is OK to define your Total Addressable Market as a “reasonable guess” Low-to-High estimate of your Total Available Market
  • It is OK to have a roadmap that only projects 12 months into the future
  • It is OK to define your initial market segment as the “customers who bought from us”
  • It is MORE than OK to define your ROI in less than 12 lines of Excel
  • It is OK to focus more on your customers and than your competitors

What do you need permission to create badly?

 

Luke is a recognized expert on agile product management of software products and a former senior software product manager at four companies. He is also the author of three books  and numerous articles on software product management. He is also a frequent speaker at software and other industry events.  Before founding Enthiosys in 2003, Luke was vice president of business development in the U.S. for Aladdin Knowledge Systems; vice president of engineering and product development at Aurigin Systems Inc.; education technical director at ObjectSpace Inc.; and vice president of systems engineering at EDS Fleet Services.

 

Interested in being a Guest Blogger on The Product Guy? Contact me.

Like, How Many Friends Does Facebook Need?

me-grayGuest post By Edo "Amin" Elan, Product Designer,  The Product Point-of-View blog

Facebook’s new, disruptive "like" feature may also be a pre-emptive solution to a looming problem: the anthropological boundaries of friend management

According to the official stats, the average Facebook member now has 130 friends. Is this too many Friends? Can you have too many friends? In fact, you can. 130 is dangerously close to 150, also known in anthropology and social media as the Dunbar number.

Robin Dunbar, a British anthropologist and evolutionary biologist, argued in 1998 that there is a cognitive limit to the number of relations that any one primate can maintain. Researching gossip, grooming and human history Dunbar How%20Many%20Friends%20...lr[1]formulated that people can only keep gossip with 150 people at any given time. According to Dunbar, “this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size … the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained.”

The Dunbar number is discussed in some length in Malcolm Gladwell’s "Tipping Point". Dunbar himself blames the Internet for simplifying his theories into a "Dunbar number", but the title of a recent (2010) anthology of his writings seems to wink to the Facebook generation: "How Many Friends Does One Person Need?" (see Dunbar speak here, mentioning Facebook).

It’s no surprise that the Dunbar number made its way to social media circles, and keeping within Dunbar number boundaries may already be one of the industry’s established "best practices". I first learned of the Dunbar number while reading a 2006 article by sociologist Danah Boyd, who researched Friendster and MySpace, among others. As Boyd noted back then, Friendser was acknowledging the Dunbar limit when it capped Friends at 150. With its current average at 130, Facebook might appear to some to be like a car running with steam shooting from under its hood.

To be fair to Boyd, she regarded Friendster’s practice as a misconception. In her 2006 "Friends, Friendsters, and MySpace Top 8" she pointed out that Friendsters were actually connecting to friends from the past with whom they are not currently engaging, so those past links should not be counted towards the 150 contact cognitive limit. That said, Boyd was far from suggesting complacency in the face of exploding friend numbers:

"Because social network sites do not provide physical walls for context, the context that users create is through their choice of Friends. They choose people that they know and other Friends that will support their perception of what public they are addressing through their presentation of self, bulletins, comments, and blog posts. This completely inverts the norms in early public social sites where interests or activities defined a group (Usenet, mailing list, chatroom, etc.) and people chose to participate based on their interest in the topic."

Escaping the Dunbar Curse

The recent Facebook "like" feature, released about two weeks ago, seems to be designed for creating precisely such contexts for social proximity. With a sufficient inventory of "like"s, Facebook should have plenty of options for contexts to differentiate between different kinds of friends. This should help to bail it out if 150 indeed turns out to be Dunbar’s Curse.

In her 2006 paper, Boyd says "While it was once possible to gather all cat lovers into one Usenet group, the size of this group would be beyond unbearable today". I couldn’t help but look into the couple-of-weeks-old Facebook "like" page for Cats- and found it had 53,544 people who "liked" it. Beyond unbearable? Sure, it’s difficult to carry any meaningful conversation in that size of community. But when I view the "Cats" page, all I see above the fold are posts that, indeed, include "Cats" but originate from my friends. So the "context", to use Boyd’s term, might have been created here – but its effect isn’t so much to generate conversation within the huge Cats group, as much as to enable the Cats context between me and my friends.

This correlates to my own experience as an interaction designer. Recently, when designing the interaction for an enterprise social network, I noticed that the more the social element was brought into the forefront, the less the total number count of participants in a "topic" mattered. What mattered was seeing that some "friends" are already participating in the topic. In fact, just a handful of friends interested in (or "liking") a  topic was sufficient to create significant peer pressure.

Simultaneously with launching "like", Facebook also continued quietly revising the news feed filters – another location sensitive to a growing contact book. In a previous post, from about a month ago, I noticed some interface confusion there. It’s now cleared.

Also note that friends lists have a prominent place in the "Account" menu in the current Facebook  layout. Editing those lists will become a more familiar, everyday activity as we learn to target our posts to "lists" (or in the future, "likes") instead of to all friends. My present Facebook policy is to accept any Facebook friend request arriving to my account, then to organize my hundreds of Facebook contacts in lists that look a lot like "Like"s.

Dunbar, by the way, did not provide a single number but a series. The first number was 5 (Bret Taylor, FriendFeed co-founder and Facebook Head of Platform Product, referred to this number as "the magic number" in the beginning of his F8 presentation).  But the next significant "friendship circle" beyond 150, Dunbar says, allows for a more shallow connection with up to 500 contacts. Last weekend, my Facebook friend count crossed that magic number. I’ll keep you posted.

 

Edo "Amin" Elan (LinkedIn.com/in/edoamin) is a Product Designer in San Francisco, CA. Elan has been following social media from its inception to its global spread. His most recent project was designing the interaction for an enterprise social platform. He also likes to draw comic strips.

Interested in being a Guest Blogger on The Product Guy? Contact me.

jQuery Plugin: Give Your Characters a NobleCount

jquerylogo256_thumb[1] NobleCount… for a more ‘proper’ count of the characters remaining.

twitter

A very common requirement with many of the more social products of the various companies I work with is the dynamic display of the number of characters remaining in a textarea, Twitter-style. When implemented, every one of these companies either developed a simple solution in-house or found a re-usable front-end plugin online. Most common, implemented within these products, and of all I could find open-sourced online, were sources lacking customization and/or, almost universally, lacking the desired user experience – updating the character count AFTER all or most of the user’s typing had ceased.

As a result, and also in my quest to always help provide my clients free, cheap and easy to use tools, I have been on the lookout for a jQuery plugin that would provide the ability to …

  • provide non-delayed, real-time character counts,
  • enable easy to customize visual behaviors, and
  • permit event and DOM hooks for the savvy with more advanced character counting needs.

While there are other similar tools out there, none adequately met my goals. Therefore, I created the jQuery NobleCount plugin.

Usage

NobleCount is a customizable jQuery plugin for a more improved counting of the remaining characters, and handling of resulting behaviors, of a text entry object, e.g. input textfield, textarea. Also, NobleCount supports pre-existing text within the text object and jQuery chaining.

$('#textarea1').NobleCount('#characters_remaining1');
$('#textfield2').NobleCount('#characters_remaining2', { / * OPTIONS * / });

As text is entered into the target text area, an object for the purpose of tracking the total number of characters remaining, defined as the maximum number of characters minus the current total number of characters within the text entry object, is updated – storing that information visually and/or within the DOM as an HTML 5 compliant data-* attribute.

Events and CSS class alterations, if defined, are triggered based on current user interaction with the target text entry object as well as the current state (positive or negative) of the character remaining value.

Example:

$('#test1').NobleCount('#count1');
<div>
	<textarea id='test1'></textarea>
	<br>
	<span id='count1'></span> characters remaining remaining
</div>

METHOD(S)

To properly initialize, both the text entry object and the object that will store the total number of characters remaining must exist and be passed to NobleCount.

$(TEXT_ENTRY_OBJECT).NobleCount(CHARACTERS_REMAINING_OBJECT);

Both TEXT_ENTRY_OBJECT and CHARACTERS_REMAINING_OBJECT must be specified and valid.

Upon successful initialization, all appropriate events and classes are applied to the CHARACTERS_REMAINING_OBJECT, including the storage visually (if not disabled) or only in the DOM (if enabled) of the integer value representing the number of characters remaining.

The target maximum number of characters (max_chars) are determined by the following

precedence rules….

If max_chars passed via constructor
max_chars = max_chars passed
else if number exists within characters_remaining object and number > 0
max_chars = number within the text() of CHARACTERS_REMAINING_OBJECT
else use NobleCount’s default max_chars

Also note that within the NobleCount context…

NEGATIVE is defined as Integers < 0
POSITIVE is defined as Integers >= 0 [on_positive will fire when char_rem == 0]

Settings

By default, the maximum number of characters is set to 140 (à la Twitter), a negative number of characters remaining is permitted, and no events, classes, or DOM attribute modifiers are enabled.

To change these settings, they can either be accessed directly…

$.fn.NobleCount.settings.max_chars = 40;

… or at the time of initialization…

$(t_obj).NobleCount(c_obj, {max_chars:100});

The default settings data structure is…

$.fn.NobleCount.settings = {

on_negative: null,
on_positive: null,
on_update: null,
max_chars: 140,
block_negative: false,
cloak: false,
in_dom: false

};

The parameters are defined (and all can be overridden) thus…

on_negative

  • class (STRING) or FUNCTION that is applied/called when characters remaining is negative IF DEFINED
  • on_postitive class, if defined, is removed when on_negative event triggers

on_positive

  • class (STRING) or FUNCTION that is applied/called when characters remaining is positive IF DEFINED
  • on_negative class, if defined, is removed when on_positive event triggers

on_update

  • FUNCTION that is called when characters remaining changes

max_chars

  • target maximum number of characters

block_negative

  • if TRUE, then all attempts are made to block entering more than max_characters
  • if FALSE [default], text area will let individual entering the text to exceed max_chars limit (characters remaining can become negative)
  • not effective against user pasting in blocks of text that exceed the max_chars value

cloak

  • if TRUE, then no visual updates of characters remaining object (c_obj) will occur
  • if FALSE [default], then the text within c_obj is constantly updated to represent the total number of characters remaining until the max_chars limit has been reached
  • note, this does not have any effect on the char_rem value returned via any event callbacks

in_dom

  • if TRUE and cloak is ALSO TRUE, then the number of characters remaining are stored as the attribute of c_obj named ‘data-noblecount’
  • NOTE: if enabled, due to constant updating of a DOM element attribute, user experience can appear sluggish while the individual is modifying the text entry object (t_obj)

Settings example:

settings =
	{
		on_negative: 'go_red',
		on_positive: 'go_green',
		max_chars: 25,
		on_update: function(t_obj, char_area, c_settings, char_rem){
			if ((char_rem % 10) == 0) {
				char_area.css('font-weight', 'bold');
				char_area.css('font-size', '300%');
			} else {
				char_area.css('font-weight', 'normal');
				char_area.css('font-size', '100%');
			}
		}
	};

Any callback functions assigned to any of the available events are passed the following parameters: (t_obj, char_area, c_settings, char_rem)

t_obj

  • text entry object

char_area

  • characters remaining object

c_settings

  • result of the options passed into NobleCount at the time of initialization merged with the default options

Having custom function append their own data to c_settings is also a great way to pass in and remember other state information that will be needed upon the triggering of NobleCount events.

char_rem

  • integer representation of the total number of characters remaining resulting from the calculated difference between the target maximum number of characters and the current number of characters currently within t_obj

Get It

You can download NobleCount, dual licensed under GPL and MIT, from…

jQuery Repository
http://plugins.jquery.com/project/NobleCount

Git
Public Clone URL: git://github.com/theproductguy/NobleCount.git
GitHub: http://github.com/theproductguy/NobleCount

Zip
http://plugins.jquery.com/files/jQuery.NobleCount-source-bundle_1.0_20100322.zip

Demo

http://theproductguy.com/noblecount/noblecount.demo.html

Status updates can be found here, jQuery NobleCount.
If you find this useful, or have any questions, ideas, or issues, leave a comment.

Enjoy!

Jeremy Horn
The Product Guy