Today’s Internet is a lot different than it used to be. With new developments such as SEO (Search Engine Optimization) and web standards, building websites the same old way just won’t cut it anymore. The W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) creates guidelines and regulations that designers strive to follow to make their sites as accessible and functional as possible. Compliance with W3C standards ensures that your site achieves its full potential across a range of systems. However, the W3C regulations continue to change everyday. Do these new rules and regulations on the Internet mean that your website has to suffer aesthetically? The answer is NO. With CSS (Cascading Style Sheets), web designers have the ability to do anything on the web, from browser compatibility to full control of all the aesthetics of any web page. CSS also gives a more solid foundation for SEO, usability, and compliance with web standards.

From a development aspect of web design, the first great advantage of CSS is cross browser compatibility. Every web designer has sat down at a foreign computer and opened one of their websites only to find that the layout is mangled. Everything is either in a different spot or not present at all. This happens because different Internet browsers, and even different versions of the same Internet browser, display websites slightly differently. Web designers are forced to test their builds on as many browsers as possible to minimize this problem. However, users constantly upgrade their computers and download new features to enhance their experience on the Internet. As a developer, you can never control all the variables, but you can eliminate the majority of the problems by using CSS – an extreme advantage when one considers that everything on the Internet is about usability. If the user is at ease and comfortable then they are more likely to return to your site, purchase your product, recommend your service to others, etc. If they get confused because the navigation moves or doesn’t function properly, they are more likely to move on to another site.

Web designers know that the power of CSS gives them many options, but a great deal of designers do not use CSS to its full capabilities. By learning about this language, you can develop it to do more. The cascading part of CSS is the most important feature and yet it is still the most over-looked. CSS makes it possible for the designer to alter one file and, in doing so; make modifications to the entire site. For example, rather than adjusting every font tag individually, this programming technique allows the designer to alter every font in the entire site by changing a single tag in the CSS file. CSS also creates code that is cleaner and less bulky than other scripting languages. Less code means that the search engine “bots” will have enhanced access to the content on your website. In turn, your website will be indexed more effectively, matching your site with appropriate inquiries from users looking for your services. Older development techniques like frames and tables limit the search engines’ ability to crawl your website, so the bot will leave without registering the content. This significantly limits the search engines’ ability to view and catalogue all of your information, and ultimately limits your presence online.

Increased ease and efficiency is another great benefit of CSS. Once you have obtained a decent knowledge of the programming technique, however, it is very easy to let the styles of the CSS control the way you design. CSS functions much like building blocks. At the bottom levels, building is very easy to accomplish, but the larger you go the more advanced and detailed the work becomes. I see many websites that boast about the designer’s ability to utilize CSS, but the site is rather plain and boring. I am a big fan of minimalism but not when it results from a lack of creativity. Which brings me to the question, has the ease of CSS made designers lazy? For some, the answer is yes, but others use the many advantages of CSS to connect creative design with utility and performance. As a full-time designer, I devote all of my energy to creating graphic-focused, visually stimulating websites with CSS as the structure everything is built on.

A website doesn’t have to be simple or boring to work properly. CSS does not limit the design graphically but instead gives the designer the power to create an aesthetically pleasing and fully functional website. If you took two identical designs and built one with tables and one table-less (CSS), the CSS site would have a higher usability across more platforms, it would rank better with the search engines, and the overall performance of the website would be better. Graphically intense CSS layouts do take more time to think through and build out, but that is why I make custom websites. In the ever-changing online world, CSS-based sites are the most up-to-date and effective way to build W3C compliant websites that push the limits of design and function.

A week after the whole United Airlines Fiasco, sir* Tim Berners Lee warns about the use of the Web as a way to to promote the ideas of the conspiracy theorists, religious nutters, corporate communicators and other assorted crazies:

The use of the web to spread fears that flicking the switch on the LHC could create a Black Hole that could swallow up the Earth particularly concerned him, he said. In a similar vein was the spread of rumours that the MMR vaccine given to children in Britain was harmful.

And I thought the Black Hole story was a feint by the LHC PR to disguise the furore about its cost ….

Anyway, Sir Tim told BBC News that there needed to be new systems that would give websites a label for trustworthiness once they had been proved reliable sources.

“On the web the thinking of cults can spread very rapidly and suddenly a cult which was 12 people who had some deep personal issues suddenly find a formula which is very believable,” he said. “A sort of conspiracy theory of sorts and which you can imagine spreading to thousands of people and being deeply damaging.”

Sir Tim and colleagues at the World Wide Web consortium had looked at simple ways of branding websites – but concluded that a whole variety of different mechanisms was needed.

This has been well known for ages though – memeticists have been studying what makes some memes survive for centuries and others die very fast, and the sad conclusion is that “sticky” ideas are more like mental parasites than particulalrly good for you (a recent, fairly approachable book on this is Made to Stick).

Sir Tim’s suggestion is that the Web itself accredits websites in various ways so the reader can ascertain the worthiness of the source. Duncan Riley believes that sir Tim has “Lost the plot”

Is not the very nature of the internet, a free platform for most, a conduit that allows the truth to shine when all around us is lies? Do not internet users in China find ways of bypassing the national firewall so they to can find the truth. Do not those of us in free countries benefit from receiving news that isn’t filtered and controlled by the corporate media elite? Is not this very freedom protection against wrongdoing?

While comforting, the view that the truth will shine out, of its own accord, against the best endeavours of those who will suppress it is a sticky meme itself, but seldom correct when put under scrutiny. Freedom of information has been hard fought for by our forefathers in the West, and even today is under continual attack.

This ties to one of the big themes the ‘Net will have to solve over the next few years, which is around the cycle of Trust, Privacy and Identity. No one system is capable of giving an accurate picture, and any system which becomes too popular will be gamed unless there is constant vigilance (Wikipedia being the best cared for publicly available system out there at the moment).

Thus the best approach going forward will be some ability to cross reference, a sort of triangulation of trust approach, where multiple authentication sources are used.

*He doesn’t like being called Sir

If a picture is worth a thousand words, how valuable is the ability to find the perfect image of an object from the entire Web? According to a paper delivered by two Google researchers at the International World Wide Web Conference in Beijing last weekend, the search-engine giant may be one step closer to answering that question.

Information scientists Shumeet Baluja and Yushi Jing announced the development of an algorithm, called VisualRank, that generates significantly more relevant image-search results than current results using text-based clues (captions and other words associated with each image).

The goal ultimately is to train computers to move beyond text into the effective identification of “rich content” — the shapes, colors and context of images that humans recognize with little effort.

Quantifying Relevance

VisualRank, Baluja and Jing reported, is designed to incorporate ongoing advances in computer recognition into Web search technology. The complicated process blends image-recognition advances with Google’s sophisticated tools for assigning rank and weight to search results.

The net effect, they said, is that within a relatively narrow universe of search results, the algorithm was able to reduce the number of irrelevant results by more than 80 percent.

But as Baluja and Jing freely concede, it is highly impractical to try to identify comparable images among the billions currently stored on the Web. To test its system, the Google team created data sets of images of the 2,000 products most commonly searched for on Google. Team members then assigned a relevance score to images produced by Google’s normal image-search tool and VisualRank.

Practical Possibilities?

One of the questions is whether VisualRank has practical market possibilities or is merely a challenging intellectual exercise. As industry observers have pointed out, the Web site Like.com also offers surfers the ability to locate images of similar products by searching for a particular element in each image….

On Thursday, Google Research engineers presented a paper at the International World Wide Web Conference in Beijing on PageRank for Google Images (pdf) to improve search results for photos, art and graphics. The system promises better image results than are currently available when searching in Google Images and may eventually improve Google Universal Search SERPs.

Key takeaways: Google’s breakthrough uses the “wisdom of the crowd” and contextual signals to rank the relevancy of images. VisualRank does not improve on a search engine’s ability to identify people or determine activities in a photo. The biggest benefits will be reduction of duplicate image content in search results and reduction of “image spam” or inappropriately tagged photos.

This morning The NY Times reported on the new ranking algorithm that identifies and analyzes “authority” nodes and “visual link structure” between a group of images. As with PageRank, images are assigned numbers to define their relevance and relative importance.

Google conducted a series of experiments by retrieving images for 2,000 of the most popular products queries in Google. Users in the experiments were more satisfied by the results and felt they were more relevant.

The Google SERP image shown here displays top ranking results for a group of queries. You can judge for yourself how intuitive and relevant the results are. Google notes an interesting result for the query “Picasso Paintings”; not only are all the images by Picasso, one of his most famous, “Guernica”, was selected first.

We’re assuming the search queries related to the product, “Febreze” were spelled correctly, unlike the typo in the paper misspelled as: “Fabreze.” The current Google image results for keyword “fabreze” are quite different.

Winners: Trademark owners of big brands and commercial products

Losers: All those people who spent innumerable hours tagging photos in Google Image Labeler:

All-time Top Google Image Labeler Contributors
1. SunChaser has 22,961,020 points
2. Zip has second with 22,353,450 points
3. FrD AUTO no car has 15,460,240 points
4. MC DUDE no man has a close 15,350,830 points
5. Mighty is hot on the heels of MC DUDE: 15,339,300 points

Google believes a Web page author will likely choose relevant images for a topic. People, though, don’t typically link to content based on the relevance of images. People link to text.

Google gives an example of an ambiguous query (McDonalds) with a logo that can be identified in photos that link commercial searches. That’s a “visual theme” or ‘visual signal” among all the photos. There may be lots of other themes that can define the relative “strength” of common and commercial images.

In terms of overall performance on queries, the proposed VisualRank displayed fewer irrelevant images than Google for 762 queries. Google’s standard image search producee better results in only 70 search results. In the remaining 202 queries, both approaches tied. Google notes in the majority of these queries, there were no irrelevant images).