Date post: | 05-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | milton-cunningham |
View: | 212 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Making it happenA6 - Web Site Redevelopment
IWMW 2001: Organising Chaos
Implementation
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Kent’s case
Structure and content from in-house
Design and template preparation by consultants
So - how to find the right outside company?
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Criteria
Varied portfoliosExperience with public sector companiesWell-presented corporate sitesStructural designInterface designGraphic design
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
First round
30 companies chosen from– Yahoo.co.uk - UK Web Design houses– New Media Age– Internet Magazine– Other Websites– Other design magazines– word of mouth
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
First round (cont.) and invite
Small group of publications team and designers whittled down and chose 9 companies with a reserve list of 7
9 companies invited to tender– brief– covering letter– publications pack– suggested timeline to be followed if successful
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
The brief - important bits
Why Kent needed a new siteWho the site was forWhat resources were available to maintain itWhat technological aspirations were there
(standards, browser compliance, speed)Corporate style and publications packHave a contract - with penalty clauses
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Second round
5 companies accepted and tendered 13 designs in all
45 staff and students invited to come and see - carefully chosen
Evaluation / ratings forms filled in by each3 companies invited to interview - 2
companies very popular and a third added due to popularity amongst design staff
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Third (and final) round
Three companies invited to present their designs to selection panel of 8– Senior management (including VC)– Web committee reps– Director of C&DO and Web Editor– University designer– Students’ Union
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
The project
Keymedia chosenInitial meeting on-site with successful
companyCommunication via email and phone
through design stages and then codingEach stage involved a “signing-off” process
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Staffing
Keymedia– Project manager - liaison role– Designer - initial stages until design signed off– Coder - later stages until end of project– Design and technical managers - checks
In-house– Web Editor - 1 fte– Support - .8 fte < 2.3 fte for final fortnight– University designer - checks
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Content
Re-organisation of current content - lengthy but possible– maintenance issues solved by pigging-backing
on paper publications schedules
New content - tricky and time consuming– Who provides this and how often?– Will they meet your deadlines for the re-design?– Can your Web team do it all? Should they?
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Challenges
Designers need to know limitations of Web as well as opportunities
Coders need to have read the brief or at least been told about it
Coders (ideally) should be as good or better than your in-house ones
Project manager needs to know their colleagues and be aware of all issues
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Costs
25k server on special offer (Sun Ultra 450 - lots of memory and big disks)
£500 to each company who tenderedEstimates of 8-18k for same briefTell them what you have and they will spend
it - is this a good idea?Razorfish - no marketing, no need - average
client 100k+ - :-(
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Milestones
Structure finished Design drafts 1 + 2 Final designs Coding of a page 1 Templates drafts 1 + 2 Final Templates Content written Scripts installed and
tested on server
Validation and accessibility checks done
Templates and content merged
User testing Be prepared to go
back to an earlier stage
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Consultation
Strategy - managementStructure - users (as far as possible),
management and peersInterface and graphic design - usability
literature, accessibility guidelines and user testing
Management and maintenance
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Those involved ...
Content writersHTML codersInformation managersGraphic designers / MultimediaServer maintainers - script installersStats producers
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
Low maintenance options
PDFsStatic pages for static contentDatabases for retrieval and collectionSSIs - Server Side IncludesStylesheetsDreamweaver templates and Library itemsExcellent search and replace tools
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
How not to waste time and effort
Use tools that save time Make sure that all pages have a purpose Check they meet that purpose Do not tie your Web site to any particular
technology Try not to duplicate the page length, writing style
and graphic design of paper documents - change your content to fit the medium
Prioritise your activities to fit those of University
[email protected] : 26/06/2001(c) 2001, The University of Kent at Canterbury
High maintenance options
Regularly changing structureHigh graphics intensity for text and fontsTemplates that cannot be changed globally
once appliedStatic pages for regularly changing contentNo search and replace toolsText editor page editing