Who are the people in your Bookmarking Network?

I first started using del.icio.us to organize my bookmarks after having lost my entire bookmarks file in a Mozilla crash. I liked being able to take my links with me anywhere, no matter what computer I was on, as long as an internet connection was available. A fellow librarian pointed me towards delicious. However, when I first started there were two elements of delicious I was unaware of – tagging and the social networking aspect of it.

Tagging is another form of folksonomy, which can be defined as a user created taxonomy. Now, as a librarian, I’m supposed to be disdainful of folksonomies. I was trained in controlled vocabulary and subject searching. However, I’ve grown quite fond of folksonomies.

Controlled vocabulary can get problematic, especially as language changes. For example, I was once doing a search for government documents on the parental advisory labels found on music albums. It was a very frustrating search because the items I needed were categorized under “record labeling.” When was the last time you walked into a music store and asked for the latest record? (note: The controlled vocabulary term is "Sound recordings -- Labeling -- United States." which is still not intuitive for most users).

In folksonomies, tags are fluid and can change as the community changes. This is much easier than hunting through the Library of Congress subject headings guide looking for the correct way to phrase a search.

Tags are also assigned by multiple people. Hundreds of people can assign a tag to a particular site. This is a better judge of the content than the way a library record is categorized – a sole cataloger assigns the subject terms, based on his or her own opinions and experiences, and then that single record gets downloaded by hundreds of different libraries. A tag assigned by many people is more likely to be the term used by the particular community.

Community is another key element in folksonomies. Library professionals, for example, could tag sites relevant to their profession with tags meaningful to them. The average person might save the same link, but use different tags. One of the nicer features of del.icio.us is that you can see how others have tagged the exact same link, and you can add or delete tags based on this information. If I find someone on delicious who has similar tastes, I can add them to my network and follow their new tags and links, and thus find information on my topic that I would not have on my own.

So the tags are only as strong as the community that’s behind it. I find them extremely useful when looking for particular genres of links, especially related to my favorite book or tv show at the time. I find other fans and see what they find interesting. It’s this social nature that makes social bookmarking so successful.

How is this useful to students and other professionals? The most important way is that it is another form of networking. Users can find other professionals in their field, other students in similar programs, and see what sites they find relevant. Users can learn from their tags, and make sure they are keeping up with the changes in the field.

I find it interesting the comment made by this blogger that “...people tag for personal, perhaps even selfish reasons. People don’t tag to help the community, they tag because it helps the tagger.”

In some respects, this is true. I assign a tag to my link that will help me find the information again. However, it has the side effect of adding to the community. Others may decide that they like my way of tagging and add my tag to their own links. My one personal choice can expand to thousands of users. The language of the tags continues to evolve.

Another blogger makes note that just because you’ve tagged an entry, that doesn’t mean you’ll be able to find it again if you have hundreds of items tagged with the same label. That’s why bundles and subheadings are so important. If folksonomies are to become the catalogs of the future, users will have to become savvy quickly. They will have to become amateur cataloging librarians, almost reinventing the wheel.

Libraries aren’t immune to the tagging phenomena. A few posts ago I spoke about my love for library thing. The service is so popular there is a library thing for libraries so libraries can enhance their catalogs.

Choosing links

What makes a link so special that I must add it to my delicious links? My main criterion is that it contains information that I want to find again. It is a place I see myself visiting again to use that information. Also, it is a site I might want to recommend to someone else. If that person has joined my network, that makes it especially easy to share.

For this particular example, I’m going to briefly discuss the links I’ve tagged with “MSPTC.” MSPTC refers to the graduate program in Professional and Technical Communication that I am currently enrolled in. I have found resources that might be useful to other students in the program.

Techwr - a technical communication community
Society for Technical Communication

• Both of these sites are important for the community they offer. Students can interact with other technical writers, learn about the profession and discuss key issues in the field.

Technical Writing - Writer's Write

• I included this site because it includes many tools emerging technical writers might find interesting, such as discussion boards, book reviews, and how to find a technical writing job.

Research-Based Web Design and Usability Guidelines

• Because web design and online communication is so important to the field, I thought I should include a link to some governmental guidelines on usability.

Usability in Website and Software Design

• Something more interesting than just the governmental guidelines. Usability is key to interaction on the web.

Tech Writer Voices: Podcasts on Technical Writing

• I am a highly visual learner, so I normally stay away from podcasts. However, since part of my goal is to enlighten others in the program, I discovered this important resource while surfing the web.

In addition to tagging the above with MSPTC, each link also has tags that are relevant to me with my own personal concerns and prejudices. However, with del.icio.us, I can see that 898 other people have bookmarked the link about usability guidelines. (Clearly I’m on the right track!) I can see how some people have tagged the same site. One person had only one tag: “webdesign” which does describe the page, but not in enough detail.

But with the tag cloud, we can see the most common tags for this resource. And the most prevalent tag is indeed “usability” followed closely by “webdesign” which is winning over “web_design” as a tag. The community prevails.

Writing for the Web

The web has changed how people read and what they expect to read online. Thus writers who hope to publish on the web need to keep their audience in mind when developing text to be read online. Writers should know how their readers view web pages - scan for information rather than use close reading, for example. Also, writers need to realize the interactive nature of the web and make use of web technologies, such as linking to outside sites and providing graphics along with text. Lastly, writers are now writing for Web 2.0 and these newer technologies are key to succeeding as a writer online.

Differences in writing for the web

• Paragraph length - Writers should stick to shorter paragraphs using plain simple language. There is no need to be verbose. Get to the point or you’ll lose your readers.
• Use visuals - Writers need to make use of relevant visuals. This includes more than just images or photos. Users now expect to see embedded video or listen to embedded audio.
• Link to relevant information - Unlike printed writing, writing on the web doesn’t exist alone on a page. Writers must link to outside content relevant to the topic. Users will expect to be able find further information on topics they are interested in.

Writing for Web 2.0

• Effective tags/labels for information organization - Bloggers need to provide relevant tags or labels for their entries. This is an extra step for writers, but it is necessary in order for information to be found again and not lost in the internet shuffle.
• Expect comments - Web 2.0 users are accustomed to talking back to writers through the comment function that is part of many blog software packages. This will make a writer’s job more interactive than ever before. Commenters can either add to the discussion, provide relevant links or can disagree wholeheartedly with the writer. It is up to the writer to figure out how much attention he or she wants to give to these comments.
• Web 2.0 applications -Writers need to be aware of the latest technologies. A blog without an RSS feed is out of touch. Writers need to keep up with other interactive web 2.0 tools such as digg, del.icio.us and sites like facebook and twitter, otherwise they’ll be left behind.

In 1997, Jakob Nielson said that users don’t read web pages. Instead, they scan pages for relevant information. His suggestions for creating scannable text include:

• highlighted keywords
• meaningful subheadings
• bulleted lists
• one idea per paragraph
• start with the conclusion
• use half the world count of conventional writing

These are good rules of thumb to keep in mind when writing for the web. But they are not the only issues to consider. The very nature of the web has changed considerably since Nielson wrote his alertbox in 1997. Writers today need to make use of web 2.0 applications, include embedded images and video, and be able to interact with their readers. This is beyond just simply linking to other web pages in one’s press release.

An example of what not to do

The State of New Jersey’s governor’s office merely posts press releases in the same format as they would go out to the print media. This fails as good web writing for a number of reasons. There are long complicated paragraphs. There are sub-headings, but they are not meaningful. There are no links to outside web pages. There are no visuals, even though photos, audio and video are apparently available through the governor’s site, but no one would know that until they scrolled all the way to the bottom of the page. This media should be incorporated directly into the press release.

On the other hand, this article from Slate does things right. It too is a lengthy article, yet the paragraphs are short and readable. There are extensive links to outside information. The graphics uses are appropriate. And it takes advantage of web 2.0 applications, allowing users to recommend the page using technology like digg and facebook.

Disadvantages

Not all of the items I’ve discussed are advantages. Sure it’s great to include embedded video and audio, but it’s not always available. Some topics cannot be distilled down to short sound-bites. And comments can turn into spam or offensive trolls. Writing for the web has its own unique set of challenges. A savvy writer needs to keep up to date with changes in technology and use them to his/her advantage.

Flash Web sites

Flash animation has been used in web sites for different purposes. It can accentuate page elements, tell a story in animated form, or present information as a video game. More rarely do we find a web page built entirely in Adobe Flash. Though usually visually stimulating when done well, entirely Flash websites have their own set of problems.

First and foremost, webpages that run entirely in Flash present accessibility and usability problems. They are often difficult to keep updated regularly due to the amount of time it takes to modify the Flash pages. Another problem with Flash web pages is that it’s difficult to point someone to specific content. For example, with one of the web pages I’m going to review today, there are several impressive student videos that I would like to show a friend. However, there is no way for me to link to the specific video. I cannot bookmark internal sites. I can only say to a friend “click on the main page, then click the second tab, then click student's work, then it’s the third video from the bottom.” This is contrary to the shared emphasis of Web 2.0. It makes it difficult to connect other users to the information.

There is no denying the artistic elements of Flash oriented webpages. The best example of this is the homepage of the Bellecour Schools of Art in France. The website is absolutely beautiful, with original artwork. The designer uses the screen like a canvas to showcase the art. Content is almost secondary.

The page is divided into three separate sections, each for a different one of the schools. Each school has it’s own color coding for the text and navigation bar that runs across the bottom of the screen. Although each school’s page uses the idea of a landscape as the background, each school has their own mascots as a theme. One uses a large robot character, who appears throughout. The other uses a futuristic city with cars and the third makes use of science-fiction-like spheres. The action is constantly moving in the background, taking your eye away from the main content and giving the user the impression that this moving content is clickable, although it is not. The page’s content appears over the background like a movie screen over the landscape. This limits the size of the content, but makes it part of the experience of using the site.

The overall effect of the design is to produce a web page that is more like a piece of art or a movie that the user experiences. When I clicked on the little cell phone/pda object in the left hand corner for more information, I was given a treat as the object grew in size and floated to the center of the screen. Then I was given a form to fill out for more information about the school. It is functional and interesting, but if I was a potential student, I have no way to print out relevant information, cut and paste important info, or bookmark specific pages for later.

The target audience for the Bellecour site is students looking for a school. It is in the school’s best interest to showcase the kind of things the students could be learning within its walls. At the same time, the website for the school is a piece of art, a beautiful site for the average web user to discover.

The colors used are on the warmer side – green, blue and orange in lighter tones. The typography is highly readable. And despite the fact that this web page has little in common with standard navigation schemes, I was able to click through and find my way through even before I discovered there was an English version of the site available.

I’d like to compare the above site with the official website of J.K. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter novels. Rowling’s official page is also done entirely in Adobe Flash. However, unlike Bellacour, she offers many different options for viewing, including a text only version as well as an accessibility enabled version. The version I am going to speak about is the standard Flash only page available in English. As per my original complaint, I can’t link you to it, I can just tell you to go here and click “Enter Site” under the British Flag.

When clicking, Rowling’s site expands the browser window automatically. There’s no need for “back” and “forward” buttons. All the navigating is done through the page. Meanwhile an eerie sound plays, wind whistling on the moors, a dog barking the background. On a light green background we are presented with the image of a cluttered desk, done in a rather cartoonish style. Clicking on different objects on the desk, such as the diary, an eraser or a even paper clip, is how we navigate through this page.

Navigating through Rowling’s site is more like playing a game than finding information. The experience changes depending on what item you click on. Clicking on the hairbrush, for example, will take you to a bulletin board, where you can click on other items. To get back to the main page, you need to find the hairbrush again. This fits into the Navigating through Rowling’s site is more like playing a game than finding information. TheHarry Potter theme of “portkeys” – objects transporting people magically to different locations. My favorite experience was found after clicking on the glasses. I was brought to a library, with books placed on a shelf. Each book was a link to a different external webpage, however by moving one marked with a question mark, I was able to find a key that opened a box, unlocking special content for me. I felt like I accomplished something and was drawn deeper in the world the web page’s design had created.

The typography used when large blocks of text are there to be read is a simple sans serif font. It is highly readable, which makes sense seeing the clutter of other images behind it. The site also likes to recreate the book effect. When clicking on her “Biography” the user is treated to a book where the pages can be turned by the click of a mouse. The typography underneath the photos and used as headers is reminiscent of handwriting, giving the users the sense that they are looking at the private memoirs of their favorite author. The text in the biography is still that simple sans serif font, which makes sense considering that many of Rowling’s fans are children who might need a simpler font to read. It’s important to note that the target audience is children. This explains the video game effect of the flash website. It is very successful and usable. Children and adults alike can use and enjoy Rowling’s site.

Rowling’s site differs from the Bellacour site in many ways. Her site is more entertaining, less focused on presenting beautiful artwork. Her navigation scheme is non-conventional. Although the site gives the impression of a cluttered desk, the items are carefully placed and arranged for the best effect. Both sites make effective use of Adobe Flash to create interesting, beautiful and usable websites targeted to their specific audiences.