SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    SitePoint Wizard jag5311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Somewhere in Indiana
    Posts
    3,082
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    A good analogy for a client?

    I am putting this in this forum because it deals with css, but it also deals with xhtml

    There is always alot of talk about the benefits of CSS and valid code (standards). Well, when you all are explaining to a client about why you are taking the method that you are, or that you are using STANDARDS if they have questions as to why you are using this method, what is your usual response. I have come across alot of people and kinda told them what I am doing and I get all excited about it because its new to me, yet I know its so good for the internet. Problem is, I really feel like I lose people in the conversation because I might be throwing out terminology they don't understand, but are embarrased to tell me.

    Do any of you use a good analogy that you tell a client that MAKES them understand why using valid css and xhtml is appropriate for a design and accessibility?

    Thanks
    Bryan

  2. #2
    ☆★☆★ silver trophy vgarcia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    in transition
    Posts
    21,235
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I don't really tell my clients anything. In the standard quote/requirements document, I'll add a little blurb like this:

    XHTML 1.0 Transitional, a modern Web standard, will be used on this Web site in order to ensure both backward and forward compatibility between Web browsers and devices.
    To be honest, standards are kind of boring, especially to those who don't care about them. I don't reference them except in that quote, and if somebody asks about it I explain further.

  3. #3
    Ensure you finish what you sta bronze trophy John Colby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    University of Central England, U.K.
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    XHTML + CSS = smaller downloads + better internal programming control = lesser bandwidth requirement + lower program maintenance cost = lower overheads = more profit potential.

    Put this another way and you'll get them listening at least.
    John
    No electrons were harmed during the creation, transmission
    or reading of this posting. However, many were excited and
    some may have enjoyed the experience.

  4. #4
    SitePoint Wizard jag5311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Somewhere in Indiana
    Posts
    3,082
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thanks v,

    nice equation John a^2 + b^2 =c^2

  5. #5
    SitePoint Wizard jag5311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Somewhere in Indiana
    Posts
    3,082
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I can understand that MOST clients will be like, I don't care how its done, give me a good project and I will give you the money.

    Unfortuntely, that is stupid thinking because they could be getting screwed over. I would almost feel "compelled" to explain the benefits of why I would be coding the way I am and how its different from other companies that code the "old way".

    I guess another good analogy would be,

    "In technology, everything is always changing and things are improving. You and I most likely always want the latest device or the most recent version of a technology. Doesn't it make sense to be coding a website with the most modern principles versus using a method constructed 5 years ago? New browsers are coming out, new handheld devices are coming out. The people who use these are all potential customers, and the idea behind the internet is to allow EVERYONE to have access to all the same information. When coding to the "old" standards, it makes people who have disabilities, handheld electronic devices, and very old browsers to access that same information because someone coded a webpage poorly. It is true, that a large population uses Internet Explorer because that is the default web browser on most users operating systems, but even if the % is 90, there is still 10%. If the webpage can be coded for as high as a % as it can, you become available to to many more users."

    Something of that nature. Your thoughts on that.

  6. #6
    ☆★☆★ silver trophy vgarcia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    in transition
    Posts
    21,235
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jag5311
    Doesn't it make sense to be coding a website with the most modern principles versus using a method constructed 5 years ago?
    The methods you use were all constructed at least 4 years ago (XHTML in 1999, CSS in 1996), so that's probably not the best way to go about it, or at least it's not the best way to phrase it. The rest of your argument is pretty good, but I wouldn't make a big mention of it outside of your quote or requirements document. If a client comes back to you, you've covered yourself when they signed off on it, but otherwise most clients really aren't going to care unless you also outline the reasons John Colby mentioned (i.e. standards saves money). Speaking to the client's pocketbook is the most surefire way to get them listening.

  7. #7
    SitePoint Wizard jag5311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Somewhere in Indiana
    Posts
    3,082
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thanks V


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •