Little Springs Design. 2001 – 2010.

Ahh, the "One Web" discussion, again. Don't worry, there's new content here.

First, let's address the definition problem. I've seen several floating around, including:

1. The link works on any device
2. Thematic consistency
3. Same technologies on every web device
4. Same experience on every device

As you undoubtedly know, we support the first three definitions, and disagree with the fourth. Sure, it's fine for some sites, but most certainly not for all.

mobile web

I'm talking about this now, again, both because it remains a major topic of disagreement and because of a recent Razorfish presentation. So take a few minutes to view John Pettengill's slides:
Is this objectionable? I think mostly not; we are looking at the slide deck, not the full presentation. Some of the weaker points were undoubtedly discussed in greater detail. It's also a well-crafted presentation.

the counter-argument

But some technologists and strategists vehemently disagree, as evidenced by the discussion about this presentation at Forum Oxford.

Their points:

1. This leads to fragmentation and transcoding problems. Not really. Device rendering limitations and differences leads to fragmentation.
2. Users expect the website to work no matter what device. Yes. Let's make that happen.
3. Mobile versions are not always necessary or desirable. True.
4. We'd have to create hundreds of different site versions: day/night, Windows/Mac, iPhone/RAZR/other phone, nationality detection, etc. This is a straw-man argument that ignores the reality of design and development.

how do you want your brand perceived?

Let's be clear: we at Little Springs Design have put together similar decks with similar messages. And we have largely similar clients, so I'm not talking to blog owners investing in my services. I'm talking to brand owners.

Razorfish's points, repackaged:

• Do you want to plan how your brand is perceived on mobile, or leave it to the vagaries of mobile rendering and have it not work on some devices?
• Do you want to use a technological subset of your current web experience, or do you want to leverage the capabilities of mobile for greater interactivity and value?
• Design content, brand, and interaction for user context.

Let's step outside of web for a moment, and consider these questions in other environments, such as retail. Franchises want to deliver a consistent experience to their customers, and have significant process, structure, and branding rules to ensure that this happens. Despite this, successful franchises adapt their brand to fit in the current context.

Take a few minutes to go look at different McDonald's storefronts in this Flickr pool; they vary widely in their context. Even inside the menu and ordering process will vary by context. McPork, sweet tea, get your own drink, Pepsi and not Coke because of mall rules are all examples of differing experiences.

So what kind of consistency is important? McDonald's fries are as I expect them. The hamburger is how I expect it. I have an idea of what's on the menu. The Golden Arches.

What kind of consistency is important in mobile, or in web in general? Core value, primary personality. Access to my content. Access to full content.

But we should consider different contexts in our design. Is a web search while the user is lying in bed at night the same as at on the bus? Maybe we make different versions, maybe we make the same but consider both contexts in the design.

our approach

I've finally managed to consolidate our web design approach into something mostly clear:

1. Consider your user's needs, brand needs, user goals, contexts, target devices, technology capabilities, and so forth. Design one or more versions of your content and interaction.
2. Design for progressive enhancement (good experience for most devices, better for those with more capabilities) for each version.
3. Build a set of page tweaks (extra padding/size for touch screens, different image sizes, different layouts for horizontal screens, don't display access keys on smartphones, etc.) to automatically re-render each version appropriate to the device requesting it.

Or: Dynamic page content must go beyond picking content from a database. It must now include context intelligence, including mobility.

Anything else will result in a suboptimal experience with lower brand value for some large set of your customers. Which might be fine for many sites, but not for all. Many of the better mobile web companies out there are doing this, though perhaps just focused on versions for different device classes. How to select the number of versions and what they support is some of the tricky bit: should a widget version have the same experience or different? High end device with NFC, location, camera should be the same as desktop or different? Same as low end device, or different? We take a balanced approach.

I say that the "mobile version" should not be subset of the full version. Let's get past that.

The mobile experience should be appropriate to the mobile context. It might have fewer, more, or the same features. Let's just make sure they are the right features whether they are on the desktop or not.

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 25th, 2009 at 12:20 pm and is filed under Design, Mobile web. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.