Managing and educating content editors

Patrick H. Lauke / Public Sector Forums / 10 May 2007

EXPERIENCES AND IDEAS FROM THE TRENCHES

Who am I?

Web Editor (M&C) at University of Salford 2001

responsible for all outward-facing content

one of the first web-standards UK uni sites

accessibility discourse for last 5-6 years

About Salford

A variety of web sites make up the salford.ac.uk domain:

core www 4 faculties 12 schools 9 research institutes 37 research centres 13+ support service ... dark matter?

How are these sites maintained?

traditionally, one web author per site no Content Management System Dreamweaver / Contribute / bespoke

admin systems

Role of web author

Covers wide spectrum:

technical post clerical / administrative academic “web / marketing officer”

No CMS – a blessing of sorts?

steep initial learning curve requires technical expertise helps keep number of authors

manageable

Flipside of “technical” nature

(for most part) web authors are “techies” not writers/editors don't generate “snappy” marketing copy “web monkeys” handed documents to

put online

First step...knowing who authors are

ISD handle requests for new sites embedded in request process keeping track of known authors ideally don't give access until trained

Requirements for external pages

technical standards (PHP/MySQL/etc) Corporate Identity Style Guide accessibility

Hit them early...

New web authors get:

all guideline documents as pack templates (if possible) personal meeting

...hit them often

New and existing authors:

staff training sessions web clinic yearly “corroboree”

It's not all guidelines

Just mandating rules doesn't work (or requires very intense QA)

If authors don't understand reasons why, they'll simply try to break them

It's not all guidelines

Moving from

“what can I get away with”

to

“what's the best solution”

It's not all guidelines

It's about quality, not compliance

How to get authors to follow guidelines?

Making sure that they understand them

“Buy-in” from web authors

Accessiblity for those who don't care...

Hypothetical, ethical/moral arguments? Showing actual benefits! SEO (particularly for internal search

engine) Use analogies that they can understand

(e.g. Word)

Make it easy!

few clear and simple rules/tips to follow WCAG 1.0 (and “upcoming” WCAG 2.0)

not aimed at actual human beings remove guesswork / interpretation adapt guidelines to different skills and

needs

Make it easy!

Be realistic! 95% accessibility still better than 0%

Right tools for the right job

Ready-made templates CMS / admin systems that facilitate, not

hinder WYSIWYG vs WYSIWYM

“...don't lead us into temptation...”

Web authors doing their own QA

Checklists and automated validation ... with caution

Giving them screen readers?

Community of practice

“the process of social learning that occurs when people who have a common interest in some subject or problem collaborate over an extended period to share ideas, find solutions, and build innovations”

Fostering a community of practice

internal mailing list yearly web “corroboree” conferences and workshops “take care of yourselves ... and each

other” create healthy competition

Support, rather than enforcement

meet often discuss potential issues early act as lightning rod / scapegoat

...but enforce when necessary

no formal central QA process guidelines with actual clout

(management “buy-in”) identifying rogues and dealing with them

Perfect process?

Far from it, but works reasonably well Majority of top-level sites ok There's always one...

What about you?