Web design in schools
07 Jun 2005Still… teaching… WYSIWYG design principles! My brother is on another computer here designing some webpage using a word processor in HTML mode, and I’m furtively glancing, waiting for the crushing moment when he discovers that his pretty fonts aren’t going to display like that in a real browser.
Accessibility issues aside, people don’t seem to understand that typography doesn’t work like print.
I’d like to go and rant to the teacher who set the project – not because they use redundant and deprecated design practices, but simply in response to their role in perpetuating these. Educators have a greater burden of responsibility here, being a catalyst for the practices of tomorrow. Admittedly, education is not the only catalyst (I think most people my age who understand the notion of the semantic web can attest to this!), but that should not diminish its potential role in this.
I argue that, in their role as educators, they have failed – their influence is a wholly negative one in this aspect for several reasons.
Web design in this outmoded form, regardless as to the WYSIWYG application used to enact this, is not effective in developing an individual’s design skills.
Note that I don’t speak of web design generally – I think, done properly, it provides an excellent grounding in design in a more flexible frame of mind (thinking in terms of fluid layouts, for example, as opposed to static print layouts). My criticism is applied only to the primary use of applications such as Frontpage or Dreamweaver as sole design tools, and more so to word processing and DTP software that perform a secondary function in being able to export HTML. Notably, use of graphic design tools is exempt from such a criticism (Photoshop, Illustrator, Fireworks… and to a lesser extent Flash – lesser because it is not designed for the primary production of graphical elements, rather for the implementation of these in an interactive and engaging framework) – these have value in the development of design skills, even if these skills are not directly applicable in an electronic context.
The notion of markup is foreign, even whilst the user recognises the purpose of an application as being to create documents in a markup language.
Clearly, such education ignores the core tenet of the technology on which it is based. Given the general pedanticism prevalent in computing-related courses (I do not comment on the depth of education, only the nature of that which is given), one would imagine that the fundamental elements, particularly in a “simple”, uncompiled language, would be addressed. Apparently not — perhaps it was too relevant for consideration?
WYSIWYG creation rejects the notion of separation of markup (content), presentation and behaviour.
The risks are three-fold.
Firstly, that production of quality content should be hindered by the bundled nature of the medium – that is, people will focus on presentation at the expense of content. The semantic web frees content-creators from this – their purpose is simply that, with layout being dictated at the presentational layer. For a broader example of this, see general criticisms of PowerPoint as being a time-wasting and hollow presentation form.
Secondly, that the content should be bound to presentation, and its longevity would be compromised by this link. This is a well-documented risk in relation to the semantic web, and one of the core reasons commonly given in support of this. Ample evidence supporting this exists, so I won’t elaborate further.
A third risk is the general accessibility of information – also well documented. The creation of quality content is still possible, but if this content is accessible to no-one due to usability barriers, it is redundant.
Promotion of WYSIWYG development methods is counter-productive in all areas — content production, general quality of design, and creation of an accessibility/usability culture — and should cease immediately in all educational spheres presently supporting this practice.
*steps off soap box*