Concepts Assignment

Concept 7: Netiquette

“Good communication practice on the Internet is not something one 'learns', but something one 'practices' so as to teach others, less familiar than yourself, how it is done.” (Allen, n.d)

Etiquette is extremely important in all communications, whether face to face, on the telephone, in written communications, or online, where it is specifically termed ‘netiquette’. By showing etiquette to the person or people you are communicating with, you are displaying respect for them, and their opinions, as individuals. This external display of respect is a precursor to effective communication; by showing respect for others, you are opening the lines for a free and uninhibited exchange of information or ideas. It is the nature of our Western society (and many others) that incidences of communication should be of a cordial and friendly nature. This puts both parties at ease and allows them to express their opinions in an unthreatening and safe environment.

There is a very important distinction to be made between face to face communications, which I shall call ‘personal communication’ and online exchanges which I will term ‘impersonal communication’. In personal communications one is acutely aware of the other, and usually their emotions. This can be demonstrated in many ways by the other, including their facial expressions, tone of voice, body language and the words they use. In impersonal communications the other is essentially de-personified, by way of their existence being made known by usually just a nickname, or online moniker, or perhaps an avatar; and the interactions being in predominantly text based. In impersonal communications, it can be easy to forget that the other is a real person, with feelings and emotions, as these emotions are not readily displayed in the myriad ways we normally receive this information, as with personal communications.

This gap between impersonal communications and personal communications can explain why some users on the internet can be very aggressive, hostile, or insulting to one another. This can often be seen in internet chat-rooms, on message boards or discussion sites. In fact, this form of anti-social behaviour is so prevalent that a term has come in to use for this sort of behaviour; Flaming. The lack of social cues that we unconsciously take from others, such as their tone of voice and facial expressions, in online communications can very easily lead to misunderstandings of messages, from which a leap to insults, abuse, and outright hostility is easily made.
In a 2006 article published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, it was stated that “"People in our study were convinced they've accurately understood the tone of an e-mail message when in fact their odds are no better than chance” (Leahy, 2006) The invisibility of the social cues that we take from others to construct the hidden meaning behind words and sentences is thus a problem that needs to be addressed by all internet users. The way that this problem can be addressed is by a collection of self-imposed social rules called netiquette. Netiquette calls on all users of the internet to participate in a respectful and constructive communication with each other, and in an implied sense it asks us all to realise the richness that we normally obtain through non-verbal cues with personal communications are not evident in online communications, and to thus behave in a certain way which promotes harmony, understanding and civility with all online users.

Site 1: Netiquette Guidelines, by the Internet Engineering Task Force.
http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt, accessed 4/2/2009
Netiquette Guidelines is a very useful site for all internet users who wish to obtain a detailed understanding of what Netiquette is, and how it is applied in real world circumstances. It was published by the Internet Engineering Task Force, a vast international network of IT stakeholders, including vendors, researchers, academics, and users, who work with the World Wide Web consortium to develop regulations for ensuring smooth operation of the internet. Their roles are many, and they are respected and well known for their wide reaching and fundamental research that covers all aspects of the internet. All of their work is extensively peer reviewed by non-commercially vested interests, which adds substantial legitimacy to their publications.
Site 2: Netiquette FAQ – Why care about the netiquette
http://lipas.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/netiquet.html, accessed 4/2/2009
This site provides an excellent introduction to netiquette from a Finnish University faculty member, Professor Timo Salmi. Salmi provides a brief and very readable introduction to what Netiquette is, and why it is important. He also gives some succinct real world examples that quickly explain to a Newbie what is expected of them in a number of online communication situations. Further benefits of this page are Professor Salmi’s extensive collection of links to a wide variety of sources for further information on all aspects of netiquette, including commercial, peer reviewed and collaboratively created sources. This gives a wide and balanced viewpoint for users to either continue their own research in areas of interest, or with which to make balanced judgments and decisions.


Concept 8: The invisibility of difference

“The daily practice of electronic communication is shaped by over-familiarity with one's own computer system, and a tendency to assume that – as with much more established forms of communication – everyone is operating within compatible and similar systems. When in doubt, seek to communicate in ways that are readable and effective for all users, regardless of their particular systems.” (Allen, n.d)

The internet is comprised of more than just the software and hardware that routes information packets from one server to another to another until the desired content reaches one’s computer. More than this, the internet is comprised of a multitude of different applications for creating, delivering and accessing online content. These applications can take the form of different operating systems, internet browsers, and plug-ins. Even more-so than with clothing, there is certainly no “one size fits all” approach with the internet. With the number and type of applications available, it is more likely that every user’s computer setup is unique. The unique nature of all computers can prove quite troublesome for internet designers and developers that want to display content on end users screens, in a manner that is not just true to the original design and the designer’s intentions, but is at the very least readable and functional.
Web designers have a number of options they can take at the outset when they intend to design a website. One of the first considerations that must be made is whether to design a website for the lowest common denominator, which is in fact a misnomer due to the manifold applications available online, or for a specific target audience.

For example, if I wanted to create a a website that could be viewed by most internet users which kept the integrity of my initial design, I would initially choose a screen resolution that it is reasonable to expect most people to have, at a minimum. At present, this would be a resolution of no greater that 800 by 600 pixels. While most users on the internet have 1024 by 768 or higher, I can not guarantee that this is the case, so I would choose the lower of the two. Further, I would ensure that the graphics were all of a standard format, such as GIF or JPEG, which required no further plug-ins to be viewed. In this setup I could be confident that the far majority of internet users would see a web page which was true to my initial design, and also viewable without the need for extra applications or plug-ins.

If I was to design a web page for a targeted audience, I could choose the 1024 by 768 screen resolution, and perhaps include some rich multimedia content, including Shockwave Flash, or Microsoft Silverlight. While this would not be compatible with the majority of users, if my target demograph could be reasonably expected to have this setup, then it would be acceptable. When choosing to use higher screen resolutions and plug-ins, it is always best practice to state explicitly what resolution this page has been designed for, perhaps even what browser it has been designed for, and to certainly include links to download the necessary plug-ins for users that may not have the required applications.

This invisibility of difference on the internet can be a perplexing problem for designers, but with solid decision making about what you want to design, and informing visitors of your sites specifications and requirements, it is a problem that can be successfully mitigated in the majority of circumstances.

Site 1: 11 Common web page design, content, and marketing mistakes http://www.newentrepreneur.com/Resources/Articles/12_Com_Mis/12_com_mis.html, accessed 4/2/2009
Roger C. Parker is a prolific author on internet design and other related subjects, with 35 books written and more than 1.6 million copies sold. While this is a commercial site and he is ultimately interested in selling more books, by virtue of his success he could be deemed to be an expert in the field of internet design. This site provides a good introduction for the new website designer about considerations that need to be made when designing websites. In addition Roger’s home page contains links to many more articles on various aspects of web design that would be very useful to consider when designing web sites.

Site 2: Lowest common denominator coding,
http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt, accessed 4/2/2009
An article written by Sam George of George Webrepro, a London, UK website design firm, provides an excellent introduction to lowest common denominator HTML coding, and specifically talks about issues relating to browser compatibility. This is a very important part of web site design, where it is necessary to ensure that one’s code works on as many different browsers as possible. While George is not an academic, his professional success and experience make his writing credible and relevant. This article does not appear to be written with vested financial interests, but is more interested in sharing his experience of creating successful internet sites.


Concept 11: The relationship of data to meta-data

“Advanced Internet users learn to intuitively conceive of any document, file, message or communication as consisting of metadata and data. They then can explore the functions of various communications/information software looking for how that software can assist them in using metadata to enable sorting, processing or otherwise dealing with that data.” (Allen, n.d)

Meta-data serves multiple purposes in the online environment; it can be used to establish the author of a page, the date it was created or last updated, it can provide a list of keywords that describe the topic and content of the article, or it can be used to describe where the information, page, or article, sits in web sites’ taxonomy, and more.

In the past the majority of metadata associated with a web page was written or included by the author of the page at its creation. The real value of metadata is starting to become apparent now to the average internet user when they are able to assign their own metadata to either documents that either they created, or to documents created by others. This enhances the documents with additional meaning for the users, and enables them to flexibly control and store documents in ways that are relevant to them, beyond the creator’s intentions.

One example of this is the enhanced metadata features that are available with Gmail, the internet mail service that is provided for free by Google. In the past email accounts have had the ability to store messages in folders, either at a single level or in hierarchies created by the users. This has been an excellent and very powerful way of storing emails in logical locations that enable messages to be quickly located and sorted according to their content, author, subject, topic, or any other criteria that was relevant to the user. While powerful, there was a significant disadvantage in this method, in that each email can only sit in one folder, and thus have only one metadata element attributed to it by the user. Gmail has come up with an innovative and powerful solution for this problem by creating what they have termed labels. A label is essentially a definable element of metadata that can be attributed to an email.

What is the difference between Gmail’s labels and your current folder system? Gmail’s solution, radically simple, has been to enable multiple labels to be defined and added to each email. So each email can have as many meta-data elements added to it as is relevant to the user. Imagine that I need to attach metadata to my emails that describe not just the supplier of a product, but also the type of product. Each type of product can be supplied by a number of companies. With Gmail I can assign both a supplier tag and a product tag to relevant emails, which enable powerful searching and categorization across metadata elements, not just within them.

This is the future of metadata – metadata that can be defined by end users and applied to them in ways or combinations that is relevant to them and their circumstances. By applying metadata in this flexible way many storage and search problems are overcome, and users can enhance the value of their online information in ways that are relevant to them as individuals, and separate from any external authority, such as the initial creator of the information.

Site 1: An Intorduction to Metadata,
http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt, accessed 4/2/2009
Written by Chris Taylor, Manager of Information and Access at the University of Queensland, this introduction provides an outstanding and scholarly introduction to the concept of meta-data, suitable for new and experienced users alike. This article starts with an explanation about metadata, and goes on to explain its relevance when searching for documents online, and also goes into the different metadata schemas that are currently in popular use. This page is exceptionally useful because it has links to style guides for different metadata schemas, as well has having a useful reference section with links to government and industry standard metadata information.

Site 2: Google Mail - Gmail,
http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt, accessed 4/2/2009
This page is an evaluation of Google’s Gmail as provided by a Librarian at Vanderbilt University. While this article is not in-depth, and covers only the surface features of Gmail, it is very interesting to see the point of view of a librarian when discussing the labels feature of Gmail. The author notes points similar to those that I have made regarding the benefits and flexibility of labeling, and thus this site provides good support for my opinions on the benefits of this feature. As this is written by a librarian at a university, I can assume that the author has extensive knowledge of metadata, and that their opinion is therefore valid and relevant.


Concept 33: Information and attention

“In the era of the ‘attention economy’, readers and users of Internet information must be carefully craft, in their own minds, the kind of metadata which will – almost instinctively – ‘fit’ with the metadata of the information sources they want, so that – in the few brief moments of initial exchange, when a seeker of information encounters information being sought, rapid, effective judgments are made that ‘pay off’ in terms of further reading, accessing and saving.” (Allen, n.d)

It is a truism of humans that first impressions count. They do with the sale of albums and books, despite being told not to judge the latter by their covers, and it matters just as much, if not more so, with internet sites.

With billions of websites online at any one time, the first and often the most important tasks of a website is to have relevant metadata and links within the site so that it reaches users in the first couple of hits returned from a search engine when users search for a specific phrase. After all, you can have the greatest site in the world, but if users that are looking for your kind or type of website do not find it, then it is of no use at all.

Once users are at your site, you need to keep them there. Due to the number of sites on the internet today, they are all competing for an ever shorter attention span of visitors; with search engines becoming more powerful and returning more and more specified results for search queries, it is more vital than ever that attention is paid to making sites relevant to visitors. There is a state of over-stimulation occurring on the intertnet, where the search for one specific phrase can return millions of pages. Users are becoming very critical of search results that come back, and thus it is becoming more important than ever before for elements such as a page title, URL, synopsis, keywords, and content to all logically link in together and provide small, and
accurate, snapshot of what the site is all about.

With the overabundance of websites, and even more problematic, the over abundance of poorly designed, constructed, or laid out websites, once users are at your site you need to keep them there. This is where the first impressions really count. It is the role of a competent web designer to lay out the information provided on your site in a clear and relevant manner, in that it is easy to see at a glance what information is being offered and whether it will be of value to the visitor. Often sites contain so much information that the challenge is to lay this all out in a logical taxonomy. Here is the crux of the problem; the information must be laid out in a way that is logical for the end-user, or the average person, not the person designing the site. Often it is very useful to have people that are totally unrelated to the project to review and evaluate how a website is designed and laid out, to ensure that it is logical to navigate and easy to find information for all visitors.

With more tools being used to create internet sites every day, and more people learning how to create their own sites, this issue is one that will get larger over time. I think it is highly likely that over time people will become even more critical of sites, and the time taken to hold their attention in new and compelling ways must be further decreased to ensure visitors stay on websites for more than a few seconds.

Site 1: The Attention Economy: An Overview
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/attention_economy_overview.php, accessed 4/2/2009
Readwriteweb is a blog that has been running for more than six years and is well known in the design community for addressing many design issues such as readability and ‘findability’ of websites. The author, Alex Iskold, is a featured writer for this blog and by virtue of the blogs reputation, and Alex’s prolific publishing, it is deemed to be a relevant information source on information economy. Beyond the author’s credentials, this is an outstanding and easy to read article on information economy that would provide an excellent introduction to someone new to this concept.

Site 2: The Economics of Attention, Style and Substance in the Age of Information by Richard A. Lanham,
http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt, accessed 4/2/2009
This page is an excerpt from a book written by Richard Lanham that is devoted solely to the topic of the information economy, terming it the Economics of Attention. Lanham is a Professor Emeritus at the University of California, and the book is published by the University of Chicago, both facts that lend substantial credibility to the author. This book is more scholarly than ReadWriteWebs site and is suitable for a more in-depth understanding of the subjects of information, attention and the internet. While this excerpt is apparently designed to sell Lanham’s book, the length and relevance of the excerpt alone provide extensive information on the topic and are an excellent supportive resource.

References:
Leahy, S. (2006)
The Secret Cause of Flame Wars. Wired. Retrieved February 2, 2009, from http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/02/70179

Hambridge, S. (1995)
Netiquette Guidelines. Internet Engineering Task Force. Retrieved 4/2/2009 from http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt

Salmi, T. (2007)
Netiquette FAQ – Why care about the netiquette. Retrieved 04/2/2009 from http://lipas.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/netiquet.html



Parker, R. C., (n.d.)
12 Common web page design, content, and marketing mistakes. NewEntrepreneur.com . Retrieved 4/2/2009 from http://www.newentrepreneur.com/Resources/Articles/12_Com_Mis/12_com_mis.html,


George, S. (n.d.)
Lowest common denominator coding. ArticleSnatch.com. Retrieved 04/02/2009 from http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/Lowest-common-denominator-coding/301124,

Taylor, C. (2003)
An Introduction to Metadata. University of Queensland. Retrieved 04/02/2009 from http://www.library.uq.edu.au/iad/ctmeta4.html
.
Jody, (2004) Google Mail - Gmail. Vanderbilt University. Retrieved 04/02/209 from http://wiki.library.vanderbilt.edu/lits/pmwiki.php/Main/GoogleMail-Gmail-

Iskold, A. (2007)
The Attention Economy: An Overview. ReadWriteWeb.com Retrieved 04/02/2009 from http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/attention_economy_overview.php


Lanham, R. A., (2006)
The Economics of Attention, Style and Substance in the Age of Information by Richard A. Lanham. University of Chicago, Retrieved 04/02/2009 from http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/468828.html