Via Guardian Newsblog, a guy called Jakob Nielsen has laid out a list of the Top Ten Design Mistakes commonly found on blogs. I guess mine falls foul of quite a few of them: no author bio (the one that was there has gone, as I deleted the Wordpress blog because it was getting heavily spammed), no picture (again, was there, now gone), headlines are not always the most descriptive, "classic" articles buried in the archives (again, I did have an "important posts" list at one stage, and got rid of it), and mixed topics (tech and religion ... although they do overlap sometimes).
I don't think that all of the points are entirely valid ones, though. Yes, I sometimes put links in the "here" and "here" fashion, but that's usually because I want the sentence to flow and not to jar. The problem of indiscriptive headlines, titled like a book, might be solved by blogware authors including a space for a subtitle, so that the "Victims abandoned" example can be extended to something more meaningful on a structured basis, like "Victims Abandoned: how the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board leaves rape survivors high and dry". Or something like that. (Although you could use the "Extract" field for that purpose.)
On top of this, he numbers having a weblog hosting service's domain name, and he includes TypePad among these. TypePad isn't like Blogger - it's a service which costs nearly as much as paying for your own hosting, and unlike Blogger it offers well-structured blog presentation with organised link lists and even a photo album service. Some of the most respected blogs use TypePad and don't hide the fact. While it's possible that they might foist banner adverts onto their paying customers, it would defeat the whole object of having a paid-for service, which is that you pay for the service rather than an advertiser. I'd actually recommend the service to someone who wants rid of Blogger's annoyances and isn't confident enough to get hosting and install software like Movable Type or Wordpress themselves. I think an uncustomised stock theme says much more about a blogger's commitment than a TypePad location - especially since you can nearly always identify a MT or Wordpress blog even if they don't advertise the fact.
(Also, b. at Underwater Light has her very succinct say on the matter.
Rather interesting how bad the design of that webpage is, don't you think?
His ninth point is rather important; for example, the other day, I wrote a comment that responded to an article in the Washington Post about the lack of fluent Arabic speakers in the US State Dept. Within the day, I had hits from people at the Washington Post, the US State Dept (naturally), and the US Dept of Justice.
One other point of his that I found of interest was the idea that serious bloggers need a photo of themselves up on the blog. My wife absolutely hates the idea of my putting a picture up of me on my blog (even though other photos of me float around on the internet). But she would prefer that my blogs at least remain "anonymous" (as much as they can be), and thus the reason for my star and crescent.
Assalaamu alaikum,
I don't see any need for a photo, although it is interesting to see what someone looks like that you know only over the Internet.
I also don't agree that the blog should stick to one topic. The blogs I read are by people whom I find interesting, and it seems natural that they'll have opinions on various topics. Some posts may be more interesting to me than others, but I don't see anything wrong with that.
"a guy called Jakob Nielsen" whilst he certainly is the font of all knowledge 4,300,000 hits on Google make him a bit more than "a guy called". His site looks crap though!
Most of what that article says is complete pants. I mean, he's right about the importance of a good title for posts, but then look at his examples of "good" titles - they're like entries in the Times subeditors' occasional "dull headline" competitions ("Low turnout as Norwegian election fails to inspire voters" was one winner a few years back, as I recall).
What is really the key to a good blog is being part of a blogging community so that there is an interaction, not that you use people's surnames or keep to a rigid publishing timetable.
Plus, as more people read blogs using RSS feeds, irregular posting and eclectic subject-matter become less important, because people just browse through their newsreaders and read what interests them.
This reads like an expert on "proper" websites trying to get to grips with this newfangled "blog" thing, and failing really to understand how blogs work or what makes them tick - trying to make them work according to "traditional" (!) website principles.
I'm familiar with Jakob Nielsen so this posting made me sit up to take notice - web designers took his words as gospel when he commented on general web design a few years back.
Anyway, if what he says is true I have clearly missed the point of a "Blog". To be honest the only reason I got into blogging was because I accidently deleted my website (backups yes, enthusiasm no). Being able to slot words into someone else's template is quite a relief - I don't know how many times I changed the template of my site, never quite satisifed with my latest design.
The truth of the matter is I don't have time any more to develop a site as I'd like. But I digress (I feel like Ronnie Corbet).
What I have never understood about this web designer cult surronding Jakob Nielsen is that his own webpage looks awful. But then, what would I know - I still typeset books.
I have just seen his "10 Web design mistakes of 2005" (http://www.freelanceuk.com/1379.shtml).
"Top of Nielsonâs hit list, advocated by readers of his newsletter, is the use of bad fonts, small fonts or ones that show a low contrast between text and background."
Well all I can say is that he's one to talk!
How Jakob Nielsen's website looks is completely irrelevant. His focus is on usability, not eye candy. Yes, my cat could probably come up with a better looking design, but would her website be as usable? (OK, the cat was a bad example.)
I don't particularly agree with everything the man says, and he is a bit stuck in the olden times; but MUCH of what he says is just good sensible advice. Why do you think people are using browser extensions that block crap (flashblock, adblock) and hack websites to bits (greasemonkey)? If you don't provide users with a decent, usable web experience, they're eventually just going to forcefully reclaim it.