web design software reviews 2013
thank you for attending today's webinar. beforewe get started i wanted to mention that one we saw all of the great credit questions andconversation about the web design standards on the content manager listserv we do thiswas a great opportunity to hold -- post this and other webinars. i am very welcome -- happyto welcome mollie ruskin and colin macarthur. they were two of the leads on developing theweb design standards. we are glad they agreed to host this event today. before we get startedi want to mentioned that we have asked all of you during registration to submit questionswhich we will focus on today. if you think of something else you want to ask make sureyou put it in the chat box. we will try to get to additional questions. this event willbe recorded. without further ado collen and
mollie. it is a pleasure to be with you all today.this is one of my first webinars. it is odd lot seeing all of your faces. i'm excitedto share this work with you and have time to give you a look at our process behind thescenes. we will talk a little bit about what is coming up next. with that, let's talk alittle bit about the us web design standards. first, i am mollie. i was the product leadand project lead for this project. i am a designer from the us digital service wherei have worked for the past year and half. previously i worked with the department ofveterans affairs and had a career in the private sector just on >> my name is: i am a you askresearcher and designer. i was doing extensive
work at the national park service in the park-- private sector. i'm happy to be here with you all today. we are going to flip our cams off at thispoint. we want you to focus on the slides. let's give you a little overview of what wewill talking about. first we will talk about what are the web design standards and whywe felt this was worth pursuing. we will also talk about our process and explain what isinvolved in this release and give you a demo about how you can get started. from therewe will talk about how you can get involved. we need your help. also release a previewof what is next on our plate. we will wrapup with questions from you which hopefully wecan answer.
what are the us web design standards? similarto other style guides and pattern libraries us web design standards is a set of user interfacecomponents and a visual style guide. designed specifically for use on us federal websites.it includes buttons and forms and information. different fields and elements that constitutemany common website designs. it also includes typography and colors that will allow teamsto have a look and feel to begin designing and building. each of the features of thedesign standards is 508 compliance. it is mobile responsive which means it workswell on tablets phones and desktop -- desktops. it was built collaboratively be with peopleinside and outside the federal government. it is a open source project with many handsinvolved. finally, we will take a look at
the standards. you will see an interactiveexample of each of the front and components as well as the code on which the componentis built. documentation about usability accessibility and implementing these features. now that we have a sense of background widelyconsidered -- consider pursuing this idea? in the past few years we have seen incrediblegrowth. in the design of federal government digital platforms. from information on materialsand online applications. because of teams like yours government websites have been gettingmore focused on directly serving the needs of users. we are seeing many examples of thisin practice. you can see this from a bunch of the work in front of you.
every individual program has evolved. we'reseeing mobile responsive this -- responsiveness. while this progress has been tremendous withinour own agencies and programs because so much of our work happens within the constraintsof our own silos we are still creating a maze of brands and experiences for end users. thisis getting more visually appealing and easier to use. each team is solving many of the sameproblems over and over. we're not only leaving users with an additional burden of makingsense of how these programs and services relate to each other. we are spending vast amounts of taxpayer dollarsdesigning forms buttons -- and buttons. there are lots of good reasons why all of that isthe case and no one would expect it to change
overnight. however, as designers we are oftenbuilding products for lots of different teams and partners across government. we startedto wonder if we should not try to explore ways to save time and bring a little consistencyto our products. as we explore this idea further we learned interesting things. we learnedthat while 508 and accessibility is a high priority sometimes it is an afterthought.particularly when using existing frameworks available in the private sector's. we arethen required to reflect your code for 508 compliance with -- which adds extra cyclesor has is failing to deliver fully accessible services. we also learned that many teamswere looking for something to help them quickly put a polished credible prototype together.something that they could show to internal
stakeholders and end users. not a lot of teamscould afford the time and resources to maintain their own design system. a growing numberof companies and organizations inside and outside the government have been taking tobuilding the style guides or libraries. it helped bring continuity. given the risingdemand for public service along with the challenges we thought we would experiment and bring thesame style library approach to creating better experiences for the american people acrossgovernment services. not just with again -- within a given agency or program. with that in mind we set out with this vision.what can we create to provide the american people a sense of familiarity and ease whenevergetting government service -- navigating government
services online all while offering a seamlessway for our product teams to create beautiful car user friendly and accessible websites. this is a start from our colleagues in uk.our goal was not to create a rigid style guide that would strip away all creativity and uniqueflavor -- flavor we understood needs are different across government. taking a page from thegovernment digital service in the uk we were drawn to this idea of consistency over uniformity.we want things to fill related. we want them to make sense. we also want to give agenciesand programs the ability to customize to specific needs. together we want to communicate trustand credibility. that was our vision moving forward.
we set out with four goals in mind. we wantedto make the best thing the easiest thing. we wanted to create something that was highquality that emulated the best of usability front end development and visual design. aboveall we wanted this to be something that was easy for people to use. we knew this wouldadd additional work hard into teams. we wanted to create something that would seamlesslyprovide a way to incorporate standards into their work. given the importance of accessibilityinside a government, we wanted to build something that was accessible out-of-the-box. from thebeginning we included 508 accessibility and compliance into every step of our design process.from the collards to the code. we made sure everything was seamlessly take -- they tend.-- baked in.
we wanted to give the american people a senseof familiarity -- familiarity but we also understood that teams would need to adaptand customize. we kept that in mind throughout the way. we recognized there were lots ofincredible examples of style libraries and pattern guidance in the world already. bothinside and outside government. we did not want to reinvent the will so we reviewed andtested and evaluated and repurposed a lot out there to produce something that compiledthe best of the best. with that in mind, let's talk a little bit now about the process ofhow we went about building on this. you saw eye to describe this as in the mobilegold standard. this is a term that comes from the start of effort. this definition comesfrom the founder started increase. a new product
which allows a team to collect the maximumamount of validating learning about customers with the least amount of effort. that is alot of words. i tried to grab a definition from sonos. the idea is to rapidly build aminimum amount of features to the boy the product and tests customers interactions withthe product. essentially what we're talking about here is what is the least you can buildin the shortest amount of time that will allow you to find out if you are on the right track? the idea about -- behind a minimum volumeproduct we want to take risk out of building holding ideas programs and services. breakinginto a small child we can get feedback on this product in particular has a tendencyto be very complicated and a vast. there to
be dozens if not hundreds of different components.we knew it would take an incredible amount of time and effort to build something quicklyexhausted upfront. we wanted to figure out the least most important number of thingswe could build and decide to get feedback on. the idea of building something for lotsof teams across government is a viable? luckily for us around the time we were thinkingof this project gsa come up with a incredible opportunity for the seed fund. they were interestedin hearing ideas from different folks who had ideas and could scale across agencies.ever going to support these teams with a small amount of money to build what we had in mind.a minimal viable product. this is me pitching to a panel as part of this process. holdingan analog quilt of various government websites.
we were fortunate enough to be selected andgiven enough money for a four-month runway. which allowed us to pull a team together.speaking of that team. the core product team was made up of six folks. a combination ofus digital service and atf designers services. we worked closely with an advisory team aroundthe government. we wanted to keep things relatively small. we knew this was the beginning. weneeded a representative sampling of other folks we thought might be interested in thiswork and or had a lot of experience building similar kinds of style guides or libraries.we worked with cfp be, fda, va, department of education as well as irs, and ssa. oncewe had this team in place we needed to figure out what we were going to build. this hada number of different aspects to it. who are
our users going to be? how will we addresstheir needs? then we had product strategy. what were we going to include? how are wegoing to build it? to help talk about that i'm going to passit back to: who will tell us about the user experience i. >> we kicked off the whole projectby focusing on the user experience of the people who would use the standards themselves.not the end-user but folks like many of you who would be trying to adapt and to use thestandards. i will talk a little more about who we talked to and what we talked to themabout. as molly said, one of our goals was to make the best thing the easiest thing.good ideas easy to implement. we wanted to understand what are good ideas to designersand developers across government and what
would it mean to make them easy to implement?because we had such a short period of time we had to think carefully about what typeof designers and developers standards interested people. with that limited scope in mind we focusedour initial research on a group of designers and developers who were interested and excitedabout trying it and iterator -- iterating on these things. what we figured was if wecannot get these folks to be interested in and excited about the idea then we could notmake this work at a broader scale. if we can make something useful for them than we mighthave a chance making it useful for increasingly broader groups of people. i will pause hereand say it has always been a priority to expand
the research we are conducting to increasinglybroader excess of designers and developers and other people who need the standards. webuilt this initial idea with research on this relatively core highly interested group. we'regoing to be expanding the user research we conducted around standards. you all here invitationto participate in that research later in this discussion. once we have this group of peoplewhat to we do with them? so i understand what kind of user experience you wanted to create.we held a lead shop where we wanted to pound the hope strings and fears of this initialcohort. we were trying to understand what could this kind of tool accomplish for thesepeople what were their fears what will worst-case scenarios that could come true and then wedug into that a little deeper and interviewed.
the interviews were used as from high-levelhopes and dreams and fears to more detailed what are the features you might need. whatare the aspects of the standards that are most important to you and your agency andmaking his implementable. many of the principles you heard at the beginning of this presentationabout accessible only use and making the best thing the easiest thing were confirmed inhis interviews. those were principles important to the users we were talking to. the everything we started asking this groupof people was did they want to be included in the standards? what were the importantcomponents? i wanted to back over to molly to talk about this product decisions. thankyou,:. once we had a better understanding
of who we were working with we did neededto figure out who we were going to include in this first release. we also needed to geta sense of what was out there in the world. what were other style libraries and designsystems inside and outside of government doing x what could be reused and what do we needto do to start from scratch. to answer the first part of the question we conducted asurvey with 40 different designers and developers from across various teams we have been workingwith the government. we asked them to review and rank the different features we needed.we pulled a list from auditing a number of different governments as well as taking alook at other libraries included. based on this we stopped at those rankingsto help inform what some of those top priority
should be. this is just a snapshot of whatis an extremely large and overwhelming spreadsheet exercise. in which we reviewed 10 differentdesign systems. as you can see cat this is a section devoted to those inside of government.once we had that initial list of features we wanted to include we then evaluated forusability codebase and visual design. all of the existing systems and trying to figureout which pieces we could reuse and what we need to work on ourselves. speaking of thatwe will have: talk a little bit about the code side of things. as we were thinking about the experience wewanted designers and it developers to have and what we needed to include in the libraryour dev team was thinking about how they wanted
to go about tilting the said -- building thisset of standards. after looking through the user research and consulting with lots ofother folks they decided they wanted the chief goal to be flexibility with consistency. thatmeant that they wanted the code of the standards the code of the components themselves to beflexible so you could use them however you need. use them a little use them a lot. usethem for the whole website or just pieces. also to provide structure and consistencythe developer and user is seeking. they decided to build it on a solid core of progressivelyenhanced html components. that is so we can provide the same or similar experience topeople across browsers of different ages and types. they also styled that html with modularcss to compile in sast so the code can be
flexible we bust -- robust and reused in differentplaces. when they were doing that they were delivered about using variables so if oncean agency adopts the standards you can easily change things like what colors are the primarycolors and what colors are the secondary colors to provide that flexibility within the frameworkof consistency. as you gather molly and i are probably not the best folks to ask questionsabout the technical details. if you are interested we encourage you to check -- check out thedata at the end of the presentation. i wanted it back over to mollie . the last aspect we had to figure out earlyon is what do we want this thing to look like. we were not interested in creating a rigidvisual brand focused style guide. we knew
there had to be some sort of visual aspect.we played with a number of different ideas and thought about different ways of approachingthis. in order to do this we needed to get a sense of what our government websites arelooking right now and what general direction we want to go after. in order to answer thefirst question we did a auditing and inventory of the visual styles and components of existingsites. we audited or check inventory from nine top levelgovernor domains . we chosethem based on traffic as well as the variety of services. they got a nice cross-sectionof what is out there. it included the va, federal ledger commission the department oflabor etc. commission the department of labor etc. we look at everything from individualelements and components to larger interaction
patterns. we also looked at visual elementslike icons colors and at the end we compared everything to get a sense of the patternswe were observing you can see here all of the various slightly different shades of blueand red. this helped informed what we needed to include at a bare minimum. from their wethen began a traditional visual design boarding process. we scoured the internet for othersites and aesthetics. what we thought might represent warmth and credibility. a trustworthyyet modern government web experience. these gather feedback from a number of differentfolks. a shaped what eventually came the color power and typography choices. we knew we wantedopen source and free fonts that would be available across government platforms. that narrowsdown the options considerably given that we
were also focused on type that was designedintentionally for legibility and screen ability. once we had that constraint we then begantesting testing testing. this is is working on the department of labor site trying outtons of different pairings and combinations which ultimately helped us get a feel forwhat would have that sense of credibility and trustworthiness. going to go back to callingto talk about once we have these in place how we went about tilting is. we dub some initial user research. we thoughtabout the decisions we needed to make. then we needed to hop into the process of buildinga. the process was pretty simple. it didn't always turn out simply but it was a simpleiterative process. our team scoured the web
for reliable and relevant research about existingresearch about each component and feature of the site we worked on. there are lots ofgreat user studies guidelines and other pieces of opinion out there about how to do thesefoundational things. like designing buttons and forms. from sources outside the governmentand inside the government. a suite of other agencies have a lot of great research recommendations.with all that in our heads we wire framed ideas. then we passed that off to our visual designteam who work to style and arrange what we created to achieve the look and feel mollytalked about. the visual and ux design team went back and forth. we try to come to greatcompromises or consensus about what the best
balance of functionality and aesthetic appealwe could achieve for each component. after we came to the consistence we figured outthe best ways to implement them. the most concise reusable flexible ways they couldcode the components themselves. then we gathered feedback on what we built. through interviewsand usability test. comments from the developers and designersthat we were working with. we try to understand what was working for designers and developers.particularly tricky components where existing research with scarce or contradictory. wedid a bit of mobile testing with andy users. as some of you know sometimes the standardsor industry practices are clearer in mobile. we wanted to make sure what we were suggestingworked for our users. we also made sure that
our work.feedback from 18f accessibility teams.all the designers and developers are accessibility minded. they really care about not just meetingthose policy requirements and regulatory requirements for making sure what we design and suggestis usable for all of our users. we built and design with that mind and body and expertisefrom 18f accessibility team to go through our code and decisions with a fine-tuned justto come and help us identify any possible accessibility issues. later in the projectbefore step also included doing qa testing. we tested the components and each version-- lots of different mobile devices. then he process began again. we would start doingmore research and more framing in response to the feedback we got. we would give eachcomponent and other cycle or two of iteration.
some of the components and sites once we wentthrough more cycles than others. must components went through at least two cycles and overallthis was a rapidly iteratively constructed project we're trying to continuously and quicklylupine feedback from lots of different people. i also want to note that many of the detailsof this process for each component are documented in our gift cover repository. not all areup there but a lot of the discussion was happening online. you can see if you go back -- if youhave a question about how you did something is not only to answer. if you are interestedin the gory details of the process for a particular component that is a great place to start.once we have done this cycle several times for each component we were able to start sharingour work and getting even broader feedback.
i will handed back to mollie . >> once we put something out there we releasedwhat we're calling our alpha. we called it version 8 we called it version 8.1 that'sbecause we released a new update since the initial release. i want to talk a little bitabout what this entails. what is included in this release and we will give you a tourand demo of the product. here is what this is. as: mentioned it is informed by pulmonaryuser research and documented usability best practice. it has been validated by a numberof folks on the phone today. it is just beginning. we have a ton we still have to learn. whatthat means is it is a minimal file -- viable product. what it is not is conclusive completefinished work by any means. many folks have asked about this particular question. it isnot mandatory. we are still working on it.
we are still refining it. there are a lotwe are doing to make this better than we're still learning how the standards work. ourteams are beginning to assess whether making some sort of requirement is on the horizon.either way there will be plenty of supermatic before then and lots of opportunity for folkswho believe they should or should not be required way and. these are not something that canget better without your help. we will talk a little more about how you can get involved.before that let me give you a spin. you can follow along on the webinar or for this urlin your browser. here are the design standards. if you beganat the getting started page everything your designers and developers need to get goingare right here. these sections offer a little
bit of russian now about design and decisions.a basic introduction to how the information is organized. to give you a little cents wherewe ended up we included just typography and colors. the base of visual style. if you look in the typefaces section you cansee the two typefaces we recommend. we have a number of different pairings. you can usethem in different ways. if you want something a little more formal you may go with the entirelyserve reproach. you can see some examples. if you are interested in something less formala little more simple and modern you may just use the [ indiscernible ] it is designed to work in a lot of differentways. a number of folks will likely keep their
own brand typography but this gives a baselinefor someone building new. here are the colors. all the colors here are508 compliant. they have been heavily tested for lots of different combinations to makesure they are visible and accessible. we have created a power which has this distinctlyamerican field but also has flexibility. it can be used in a more modern popular way.[ inaudible - static ] altogether it feels traditional. we also provided guidance ontext accessibility. how you can use the colors when you type to make sure they are indeedlegible to people with visible disabilities. let's take a look at one of the components. you can see on the left side we have thesebasic most foundational elements of sites.
every component has a interactive example.it is mobile responsive. as you open closure screen it responds. everything has the sixflexibility and usability guide. as well as sample code you can copy and paste as needed.a few other cool things the form controls or various different pieces that come togetherto build different aspects of the form. yet text inputs and drop downs. this is all interactive.you can also tap through the site. the code includes [ indiscernible ] and have abilities.[ inaudible - static ] are the build that's. and inform or sign informed. the password reset is one of my personal favorite's.it has a feature when you start satisfying a criteria all of the items checkoff. thisgives you a general cents of what is on the
site. once your team is ready to drive andwe encourage your developers to check out the get help prepare. all of the code is there.they can download the entire package code framework or just copy and paste from thewebsite. there is guidance on getting started in setting up your local environment. fordesigners we have all of the components available in illustrator and sketch hopefully we willbe supporting more design palette file types in the future. that is enough to give team something to downloadand play around with to build on different products. with all of that, i would love toshow you a couple of examples of some of this in practice. as we said this is just beginning.we cannot necessarily expect a lot of teams
to hit the ground running and building stuffout. we did have a number of folks trying this on. since we released a standards wesaw awesome things people were building. i thought i would share that with you. the usthat built a better -- voter registration not. you can see they have used the standardsand added their own pop-up and information about how you registered to vote in differentstates. exciting stuff. one of our colleagues created this html template into a. you canenter information on the left pane. it updates in the styles of the design standards on theright side. which you'd can current we also sniffed out the usa job folks. thepeople in opm. copying the design standards into their own version which is so exciting.they have documented where they deviated and
where they are creating new things. exoticon work that will help us focus into new versions going forward. speaking of new moving forward.:do you want to tell us how folks can get involved? as molly said, the one thing this will notdo is get better without your involvement. there are lots of ways you can get involved.number one, tell us what you think . what is working what's not working with missingwhat would you like to see in future releases and what other questions we should about.you can send your feedback to us web design standards@gsa.gov or you can submit an issueon get help at the address printed on the slide it is great if you can issue -- openan issue because other people consider responses to what you say it is a great place to havea community discussion. we understand some
of you may not be comfortable or have access.the immunologist is fine too. we will get your job -- thought the way. if you see thefeature you want is missing or you see a bug in the existing when you are trying to use,feel free to submit code or design ideas. feel free to open a poll request. we will review it and figure out how it fitsinto what we're doing please contribute if you are interested. let us learn from you. if you are interestedin participating on our ongoing user research about the standard cited self and how it workedfor web designers and developers we would love to talk to you. we particularly wouldlove to talk to you and observe your process of using this site and what works and doesnot. the best way to do that is to sign up
from the standard cited self. if you go tothe standard site will probably see a little pop-up that asks you whether you are interestedin giving comments or signing up for an interview. if you fill out the form we will get in touchwith you. if that is not worth feel free to send us an email to the address listed andwe will get in touch with you. finally, please show us our products. if you are trying touse the standards we would love to start with that is looking like to hear about how thatis working or not working send screenshots to get help or to the email listed above.we would love for you all to get involved. there are lots of avenues to do that. thisis only going to get better with more help from you.
what happens next? where do we go from here?as we describe this has been a relatively small effort by design. now it is time toturn it from an experiment into a product. the us-led design standards are going to continueto be a living maintained product available across the government. the site will be updatedregularly. always with an emphasis on having that informed by feedback from our collaboratorsand colleagues across government as well as research and testing with end-users. we havea lot of learning to do before we can call this done. let's talk about what is next. right now we are focused on collecting feedbackand ideas. we're doing the traditional user research and reviewing suggestions comingin online. we are also sitting down with partners
talking about policy implications and helpingpeople think through how to sell this and support this work within their own agencies.we are also looking for new ways to collect the tax and ways for people to engage witheach other. the developer tech focused webinar on the design standard is coming up on november12. you will get a link and details after this webinar. we help you or your teams willjoin for that and dig in to the nitty-gritty tech side of things. based on the feedbackand ideas we're not developing a product roadmap for upcoming releases trying to figure outwhat features are to be added and continuing to build that design cycle. this product was a copartnership between thisdigital service and 18f. we're now transitioning
into a fully gsa owned product team. we haveheard a lot for additional documentation. we are working on our language for contracts.creating a one pager to help with senior stakeholders support within your agencies. giving a littlemore detail developer guidance. we are also trying to come up with some better channelsfor sharing design national and communicating. that wraps up all of what we wanted to sharewith you. thank you so much to the people around the government who have been involved.thank you to those who have chimed in already. ideas are incredibly helpful and informative.this is really just the beginning. we are excited about where it goes from here. hopethis has been helpful and informative. we thought we would use the rest of the timeto answer questions. with that we can turn
the webcams.com. i'm happy to take questions. i'm going to serve as our moderator and relayquestions to molly. she may ask me to answer some of them. i want to thank you all for all the questionsyou sent in. we tried to preemptively answer a lot of them in the presentation. one bigquestion that also came up was how we're going to encourage adoption of the standards acrossagencies especially if we are not going to require them. that is a this is a question. i want to emphasizethat part of the reason we're not requiring anything is we're still your -- learning somuch and improving peer it seems a little
premature to ask questions to ask people todo that much work while we are revising this. one of the ways we're going to have surfacearea to encourage gradual adoption is through the work of atf and the us digital service.we have a lot of surface area amongst all of our teams to a ton of different agenciesand programs across the government. all of our teams are now working on updating to encouragestandards. we have also began some initial conversations with leadership of differentorganizations to help them understand why this is important. we set it at the beginningthis is making the best thing the easiest thing. that is part of the strategy. we wantedthis to be something that makes everyone's life easier not harder. hopefully the ease-of-usewill encourage adoption as well. without any
hammer it is up to individual discretion.we are happy to help folks make the case and give examples. be a resource as your try toincorporate to various products forward. >> we have a few questions about how agencies couldgo about using the visual design guide in conjunction with keeping their existing lookand feel and complying with their branding guide. which seems like a reasonable question. i think that is an interesting challenge.part of the reason we tried to create something relatively neutral. i know there are lotsof agencies that have colors and instead there is quite different. we do not expect thoseto -- folks to make drastic changes. what i would say is that part of the reason wecreated the visual style guide is there are
often time products. there's an inclinationwith new products and services to find somebody to do it to branding exercise. we wanted tooffer a baseline so it doesn't have to happen over and over again. in some ways this isnot necessarily about rebranding as much as a race line to start from if you don't haveanything to begin with. i will say that i do think we should all be looking at why itis we have distinct flavors. sometimes there are strong reasons. sometimes the reason isnot clear. particularly when it comes to typography we should be prioritizing accessibility andlegibility. the more we bring these things closer together a stronger that will be. withthat psychol we write the code in such a way it is easy to change the styling. just becauseyou have your own branding and your own topography
does not mean the components and patternscannot work for you. you can still use form fields and radio buttons while sticking withyour traditional guidelines. a couple questions about accessibility. dowe develop a guy with a view cag 2.0 aa in my absolutely. those are the standards we usedto evaluate all of the 508 compliance colors. a couple questions about consulting with existingaccessibility board and other accessibility interested groups and government. did we dothat? what about plans to do that in the future? we originally -- the beginning of this projectwas about getting something out there. we consulted with some thought inside gsa tomake sure we were passing the baseline. so
we to put something out for these other groupsto give us feedback on. it is very much a priority moving forward. sitting down withvarious organizations who have this expertise and learning from them as we missed and thingsthat need to be done differently. >> a couple of technical questions about what frameworkthis is based on. is it based on bootstrap or something else and are we planning to rollout web components. does a good questions to take to the top webinar. in my right -- we -- yes. the very not technicalanswer is we did not use the strap. the technical folks can give you insight as to why. we basedsome of the code off of urban and use the mix in the library. they can explain whatthat means and a little more about the rational
much better than i can. there are links toinformation on the standard site itself. i encourage you to join the webinar to hearsomeone explain it better than i can. a lot of questions about particular componentand when they might be included. for example images and graphics are something we don'ttalk about a lot. when will that be added in the broader question we're getting is whatis the time line on which new things will be added and what will be added? great questions. i'm not going to give a concreteanswer because we are very much in the process of figuring that out now. what i can say withregard to time line and what features will be included is this is exactly the kind ofinformation we need right now. we prioritized
originally based on an initial set of ideas [ silence ] >> it looks like we're havingminor technical difficulties. we're trying to fix that for right now. 70-- i think my connection cut out [ inaudible- static ] you are back but we cannot see you. holland does we have six minutes to get throughas many questions as we can. a couple of questions. why are these beingcalled a standard? we use the term because we were interestedin creating something that helped set the bar. the idea was to create a new standardfor the experience we were having for our
services and what customers and users wereseeing on the other side of things. that term has a lot of implications inside of government.we have heard a lot of feedback about what works and what does not. we are definitelyconsidering modifying that or understanding a little more about the policy implicationsit helps give credibility. to help give power behind the idea. also the fact that we areconsidering the options for pursuing whether or not these will become an official standardmoving forward. help -- there are lots of folks who share different opinions. >> i believeyou are meet. -- on mute. and my back? you are.
a couple of specific questions about componentsthemselves. in the for the area there is a agency logo image placeholder with the individualproject ranging -- will the individual product branding go there or just the agency? i believe that is a case-by-case situation.i believe we imagine that is where the local soup lives. i also think it depends on whatis happening with the framing of the project and initiative. some projects co-brand thelogo of the organization with the name of the initiative. sometimes the agency takesa backseat to the branding of the campaign. i think what would be fantastic . if you developa model or template we would love to see it. how did you decide to suggest the date ofbirth being typed instead of drop downs?
do you know the answer to that? i do know the answer to that. to be honest only tested it a lot of themwere used to seeing them drop downs. i would say that is still open for discussion if youhave strong opinions. we reviewed a fair amount of research which suggested long drop downscontaining all the possible days of the month are harder to navigate in take longer to enterthe in text fields. based on that research in based on some of the research the uk digitalservice did we decided to try establishing birth feels that way. however, i would saythat is something we are interested in testing with users. if you are interested chinmanon get help. we have a few questions about
about -- about will we might go whether thestandards will be harder not or how they will be required. i do not think we have a sense of a time line.we are just beginning the conversations with policy councils ownby and other places tofind out what various folks have in mind. we did include some language about this inthe national action plan which the white house recently put out earlier this week encouragingadoption of the next 5 years. i can guarantee there will be copious opportunities for inputfrom various folks as well as plenty of heads up it is not something you will get a noticeabout someday . this is just the initial test. is this something worthwhile doing beforewe make the leap to requiring it.
great. another question about how we can justifymaking changes to sometimes huge websites with the current administration coming toan end and the assumption that a new administration may want a new look and feel? part of the reason this is moving into gsais this is not something that has a political bent to it. this is something that is verygrounded. what we know as well and believe and stand behind. i would be surprised ifthere is an administration that takes a strong potato does political stand. i think the questionabout the factoring large websites is completely legitimate. any time a decision is made itshould be one informed by a standing of user needs and we're not necessarily asking anyonewho does not have a road back for revisions
to take time out to do that now. i think thatis a good consideration. i would not worry too much about this adding new complexitiesto the political stakeholder williams that exist and we are subject to.'s that we area little over time. i wanted to ask another great question. what channels will we useto keep the federal web manager community informed about future milestones? >> we willcontinue to frequently engage on the list serve that many folks have reached out toas well. i think we are going to set up regular calls that will allow anyone publicized onthe listserv -- that can be a regular opportunity for people to chinman and engage. once weget further along talking about new features and policy implications we will pursue settingup regular meetings for people to engage in.
as we mentioned earlier we are also consideringdifferent digital channels that will allow our people to participate. still trying tofigure out the best options there. our intent is to be overly communicative and give peoplemany opportunities for feedback. i'm going to hit it back over to alicia. beforei do we see the questions you asked and there are other questions we will follow up withfolks individually. we really want to answer all your questions. inc. you all so much. we really appreciateyour interest. there are lot of big ideas here. thank you for taking this risk and pursuingthis idea with this. we are excited to work together forward.
thank you both for this informative eventand for organizing it in a short period of time to respond to the questions and discussionon the listserv. want to remind everyone that we sent out a eval. please fill it out. itwill help guide the events we develop in the future. also this event is being recorded.you will be able to share with your colleagues. please vote for the november 12 technicalevent on how to use these web standards and get your technical questions answered. welook forward to that. thank you. >> [ event concluded ]
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar