Blogger Redesign - IE proves a challenge

a study in web standards and usability

[tedster]

A very interesting and ambitious redesign of Google's Blogger.com [blogger.com] was rolled out this week. Lots of attention to web standards [XHTML 1.0 strict] and although their mark-up still doesn't validate, they promise "it will soon."

Usability issues took the forefront, working from the stats about where people abandoned the blog creation process. I hope we get to hear something about how the stats improved (or not.)

The blog templates are all fixed width[!] - now there's a blow to the liquid layout crowd, but one I personally agree with.

Developer's comments:

The frustration of building a design in CSS and getting it to work across all browsers is certainly more apparent when you’re trying things you’ve never seen done or explained before. IE was the main culprit. Both Windows and Mac versions proved exceptionally difficult to bring into submission, but at least the Mac version had known workarounds and filters.

StopDesign's blog entry on the launch [stopdesign.com]

One very cool bit of added functionality:

The addition of e-mail posting is part of Blogger's strategy of being a tool for nontechnical users. Through a designated Blogger e-mail, users can send content for posting from any device supporting e-mail, including cell phones and PDAs.

eWeek's Article [eweek.com]

[bumpaw]

I wonder what the usability issues are that caused them to have no end tags for <br> and <hr>. They are showing 25 problems. I could sure learn a lot if I new what their problems with these were. It's great that they are trying and will be fun to follow their progress.

[edit_g]

IE proves a challenge

Depends on how you do it - design for the biggest audience first and then for the others. I usually try to get IE right first and then make it work in Moz, Opera, Safari, Lynx and NN. I know that sounds wrong - but its just how I do it. It's worked well so far.

[tedster]

no end tags for <br> and <hr>

Yeah, I saw that - very odd. Validating wasn't their first priority, I guess, and they may be new to XHTML as well. But I don't think validating SHOULD be anyone's first priority either. You won't get a good ROI just because you have a W3C logo.

[SuzyUK]

Web standards, Usability and IE in the same sentence, that's bound to be a challenge..

At the time I checked it.. their whole page did validate with an HTML4.01 doctype. I supposed it was just gonna take them some time to go through their scripts and XHTML them.. but why didn't they just change the Doctype temporarily?

but at least the Mac version had known workarounds and filters.

I find that admirable (Mac programmers ;)) but also a bit strange considering their field, I'm probably missing something, but aren't there more Win documented validating workarounds/filters than Mac ones..imo usually one/two workarounds cure a multitude of "win sins" ~ or is it that there are more "win sins" in general?

The frustration of building a design in CSS and getting it to work across all browsers is certainly more apparent when you’re trying things you’ve never seen done or explained before

Now that I find strange from Mr Bowman..or does it just read badly? Does this mean that these "top" standards designers have had their heads stuck in the specs/recs too long and not really taken time to experiment (with non-rec code) to find out what does actually work, validate and is still usable?
If so he obviously hasn't visited WebmasterWorld enough :)

In case all that sounds bad, it's not meant to be, it's just some things that struck me. I like it, it's a blog look for a blogger site, by some of the best standards bloggers around.. :)

Suzy