The Growth and Evolution of Microformats panel at SXSWi has been added to the rather handy panel planner on the SXSWi site (shame it’s not marked up as hCalendar though – [edit] the panel picker has now been microformated!). It gives a little bit more of an overview about what it’ll be about:

In its first year, microformats.org ushered in the rapid adoption of key formats for publishing and sharing tags, licenses, contacts, relationships, events and reviews on the Web. See what new microformats are being developed for resumes, classified listings, music, and media, as well as how tens of millions of established microformats on web sites of individuals, companies, and organizations are driving innovations in desktop applications and advancing personal data portability

<p>You’ll also note that the rest of the panel is announced too.  We’ve got <a href="http://tantek.com" rel="friend colleague">Tantek</a> of course - *the* microformat advocate, and moderating the session.  <a href="http://www.kaply.com/weblog/" rel="colleague">Michael Kaply</a> from IBM is the man behind the <a target="_blank" href="https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/4106/">Operator</a> toolbar for Firefox, which in my mind is the most complete and fully functional addition for Firefox for detection and use of microformats.  <a href="http://www.glennjones.net" rel="friend met colleague">Glenn Jones</a> is the only one of the bunch I’ve had the pleasure to have met before - he was 1 third of our <a href="http://www.fberriman.com/?p=95">microformats triple bill</a> at the first <a href="http://barcamp.org/BarCampLondonSep06">BarCampLondon</a> (along with <a href="http://allinthehead.com" rel="friend met colleague">Drew Mclellan</a> and myself). He’s an implementor and created the <a href="http://webdd.backnetwork.com/">backnetwork</a> which is stuffed to the gills with microformats.  He also presents on the topic, and did so recently with <a href="http://webdd.backnetwork.com/feeds/post.aspx?postid=297">Destroying Walled Gardens</a> at <a href="http://barcamp.org/BarCampLondon2">BarCampLondon2</a>.</p>
<p>Then there’s me, of course.  Makes me consider my place in the group though.  </p>
<p>I mentioned this to a few people and they simply said that I was the human side of things.  Possibly more down to earth and using microformats in day to day development.  Not too many ideas of grandure and using them practically, and advocating and explaining them in simple terms to those who want to learn about them.  </p>
<p>I’m also the most community involved panelist.  That might not seem important, but when you realise that microformats wouldn’t exist without the community it’s a lot more.  Every spec and decision made about microformats is done by an organic community of people, like myself, who are enthusiasts.  It’s this organic growth thats let microformats spring up out of nowhere and gather speed and support so quickly.  </p>
<p>I think it’s a good mix though, and I’m looking forward to the panel even if I am a touch nervous.

I have many microformat related posts (rants?) to come, but they’re best saved until after this weekend since BarCamp will make a better foundation for said discussions. Looking forward to what is turning out to be a little bit of a mini microformat camp though!

So on another topic - Twitter. I know, plenty of people have spoken about it, but I just haven’t been inclined to yet. I am now since the novelty is starting to wear off (I’ve been using it since November, I think) and this seems like as good a time as any to give my thoughts on it.

Twitter basically is sort of like web-based status messages (like you’d have on MSN messenger). Twitter asks “What are you doing?” and the correct response would be a 3rd person answer such as “looking at twitter.”. Anyway, what’s actually happened is Twitter is a status updater and a really slow IM client in one. I think it’s because Twit’s can be grouped into two main types:

• Status updater - this kind of Twit uses Twitter as intended and updates in the 3rd person about what they’re doing at that given time, or what interesting location they may be in. This kind of Twit generally dislikes the types below for muddying the stream. Often these Twitter’s could exist alone and don’t tend to be a response to anyone else, or require feedback. It’s a rather solipsist world. (I kind’a dig it.)

<li>Chatter - these treat Twitter like an IM client, generally holding conversations on the site.  Lots of “@Bob - See you there!” type messages.  To know who, what and where these Twits are you have to friend and follow all of their friends.  These Twit’s think the type above are boring.</li>
</ul>
<p>Of course, there’s a bit of overlap.  I try to be a Status Updater, but occasionally I fall into Chatter mode.  I don’t dislike either type, really, although my friends list has had to be culled a few times to remove those that I feel twitter too often, and those Status Updaters that only update about eating their lunch soon got lost as well.  </p>
<p>I actually quite <em>like</em> Twitter on the whole.</p>
<p>What I actually like about it is the ability to keep in touch with people I don’t see very often, but wouldn’t necessarily chat to or email.  A good example is the Brighton geek crowd - I see them from time to time, but now when I do see them I already know what they’ve been up to without having to go through the “How are you, what’re you up to lately?” mundane conversation because they all twitter update.  I know exactly where they’ve been and what projects have been driving them potty, and can cut straight to the chase.  That really works for me.</p>
<p>Another thing that interests me about Twitter, on a personal level, is how much I like using it when I’m away from the computer.  There’s something odd about me (and others) that makes me want to check in on my mobile and actually prove to people that I do go outside occasionally and maybe even go to interesting places.  Why do I need to do that?  I don’t often turn the updates on, so I don’t see any responses if there are any.  I think I must like solidifying the things I do in digital form.  <em>If it’s on the web it must be true!</em></p>
<p>As an aside, there is actually a 3rd kind of Twit.  The News Twit.  Generally, these are automated (the <a href="http://twitter.com/bbcnews">BBC news</a> headlines are available) but there are one or two human-controlled streams popping up, like the <a href="http://twitter.com/microformats">microformats one</a> we’ve set up and have been using to announce events.  I’m not sure how much I like this.  It doesn’t really fit - why not just subscribe to the RSS of the actual feed if there is one?  Jury’s out.</p>
<p>Ultimately though, I’ve always thought that Twitter can’t last as it is.  It needs better filtering and friends control - the noise is starting to get too loud.  Perhaps interest groupings?  Channels?  It works for IRC (which is still my preference for digital communications).  It needs smarter phone commands that might let Twitter become a worldwide answer to <a href="http://www.dodgeball.com">Dodgeball</a> so that it can be used more easily for getting together with friends and finding out what’s going on and where.  It’ll be interesting to see how useful Twitter will be in Texas next month, if at all.</p>
<p>I’m still checking in on it, but I’m not sure for how much longer.

Last Monday I had the opportunity to visit the Test Partners, after an invite by Steve Green, to attend an afternoon of screen reader demonstration. I’m exceptionally glad I went, and it’s a shame I’ve been too busy to mention it sooner.

Firstly, the session concentrated on a specific sub-group of internet users - the blind. Steve made a point of saying that with any project you need to decide who your target audience is as measures to help one group of users may be mutually exclusive to helping another. As such, he stated clearly that within this session (and my feedback below) that the techniques and problems raised are relating to those specifically who are visually impaired and using screen readers.

However, in my opinion, a site that is easy and understandable to navigate for screen reader users probably does go a long way to making this whole web experience easier for a range of people with varying difficulties and user needs.

We ran through JAWS operation. JAWS in particular because it has the market share of screen reader users.

From testing on live sites, it became clear pretty quickly that headers and lists were really, if not the most, important. Properly used headers (semantically correct) give an easy way to navigate to prominent areas of the page and also give instant context.

The logic behind putting navigation buttons into lists also became ever so clear when you hear JAWS inform you that there is a list of 6 links coming up. Not only does that sound like a navigation, you can easily be ready for how far into said list you’re probably going to have to look to get to the section you want (somewhere in a dozen or a hundred links?).

<p>The reason these two things are particularly important is because of the way a blind user creates his or her visual model of how the site works.  They can’t just glance at what’s coming or where something is.  They must make a top-down mental image of what’s available on the page by running through the entire document (unless they already know the site and can rely on it being the same as the previous visit).</p>
<p>This method of mental navigation shows why consistency and predictability are really vital.  I’m not saying that every site should be laid out in an identical way, but subsections of a site should follow a template defined by the initial landing page and navigation should be pretty standardised.  </p>
<p>Thinking about this does remind me of a reason why I like <a target="_blank" href="http://microformats.org">microformats</a> and think they may have some potential as accessibility aids and therefore why I’d like to see them utilised within something like JAWS.  </p>
<p>Microformats are a way of standardising more specific elements within a page, and I’m sure it would be useful to some if they could have JAWS announce to them that the page they have just landed on has 4 headings, 12 links, <em>a contact and 3 calendar events</em>.</p>
<p>The reason I mention microformats in particular is because it’s something I’ve been giving some thought to for a while in direct association with accessibility and think I’d like to elaborate on in the future.  Feedback in this area is especially welcome.</p>
<p>For me though, the most surprising thing was being told that by default, most SR users <strong>don’t</strong> read title, acronym and abbreviation attributes!  A majority of users find it annoying to be given the extra (and often superfluous) information.  The lesson learnt here is to make sure that everything that is important to the understanding of a document should be in the actual page copy, rather than hidden away in tag attributes.</p>
<p>There were many other bits and pieces of interest - from reminding us all that display:none <strong>is</strong> adhered to by JAWS to writing good copy can go a long, long way, and then that access keys (uh oh) aren’t particularly utilised or useful because most sites don’t offer them so they cannot be relied upon.</p>
<p>The thing is - JAWS is a bit smarter than I’ve given it credit for.  Saying that though, from the feedback from John, a vast majority of users aren’t advanced users and probably aren’t toggling features on and off to get the most out of a site.  </p>
<p>So, there’s two things there - users probably need more training, or at least opportunities to learn how to use websites on their own in some way, but equally as publishers to the web we should be making the best effort to present information - and that’s ultimately what we’re all doing after all - as clearly and as simply as possible.</p>
<p>Web standardistas will already be doing this I’m sure and rolling their eyes at being told yet again, but it’s important not to forget <strong>why</strong> you’re doing it.  It’s not just about being <em>correct</em> for correct’s sake; it’s about giving everyone a <strong>fair chance</strong>.

On Saturday I got to go on a trip to Oxford. I’ve only been there once before, and that was at night for a work function so I didn’t really get to see it. It’s a pretty place. Steve and I went along to a little lunch at “The Big Bang” that John Oxton organised with various geeks. The food was great. The Big Bang is a place that just does sausage and mash - I, of course, went for one of the veggie options (mushroom and garlic, I believe) and it was yum. We stuck around for drinks down “The Friar’s Entry” (yes, I know) and yeah… generally chatted about all things geek and custard.

Last night was 20×2. I genuinely remember little about my slot, bar the panic. The problem was I had a keynote presentation, and I thought I’d be able to run it from my laptop - but I had to have the slides on a different one, and my notes from my version on Steve’s mac - so I was trying to operate the laptop, the remote and hold a mic and speak…blah, blah, blah. Yeah. Too much tech., not enough nerve. Plus, the lights were bright onto the stage, so I couldn’t really make eye contact with anyone - which tends to help me, and I couldn’t see the warning lights - so I probably over-ran badly. Argh! Why do I do these things to myself?

Oh well.

<p>Other than that, I had a really good night.  I got to meet a few more faces, and everyone else’s slots were really, really cool.  A proper variety - artists, musicians, comedians, bloggers… all kinds, and all surprisingly different in their take on the question.

As if by magic, Jeffery Zeldman yesterday published an article about print style sheets, which just happened to be what I was tangentally ranting about in the car on the way to work the other morning. Most of us support printers about as badly as we support screen readers, and I don’t think the two devices are that far removed - both are mostly “out of sight, out of mind”.

What I was more specifically complaining about was screen readers and their general lack of support from the web community.

I’m under the firm belief that screen reader support is rubbish for two reasons:

• None of us use them (”us” being the general web dev community).

<li>Screen readers are expensive, clunky and support the specs even less than some of our most hated normal browsers (and then have to work with browsers that don’t support the specs well either).</li>
</ul>
<p>Because of the first reason - we’re not pushing screen readers to be developed well.  Why isn’t there a good, free, open source screen reader?  “We” don’t need one.</p>
<p>I’d really like to encourage people to start trying out some of the screen readers (most will run in a trial/demo mode for a period of time).   If a few more of us incorporated screen readers into our testing (if you’re not already, why the hell not?) and then perhaps started badgering those developing these products to improve them, we could have some decent products for everyone.  </p>
<p>Remember the spread firefox campaigns and “web standards” pushes that worked so well?  We desperately need one of these for screen readers, and to be frank, it’s going to take people giving a damn about others to happen because this is an area outside most of our personal uses.  We also need developers who are willing to put some time into working on new open source products that can be used by, and improved by, everyone.</p>
<p>How can we do this?  Do you think it isn’t worth it?  Feedback people.