Statisfaction

2 thoughts on “Statisfaction”

  1. Lovely to see replies to Blog posts. I had one myself the other day from RaboBank’s GM (http://www.flog.co.nz/2006/03/20/usability-taxes/#comment-6414). I can’t quite figure out if this is a sign of success or not. “Was that this the aim? Will it make any difference? Why are supposedly important people trawling the web in search of blog posts regarding them?”

    Mr Smith seemed quite defensive (probably rightfully so), and most of his responses seemed quite pragmatic and had some thinking behind the choices made. But I suppose that’s usually the case, bad usability decisions can still be defended.

    I find the “99% of users had javascript on” stat to be an interesting one – I wonder if you could prod some more to see if you could get some more insightful statistics on the event?

  2. Hi Adam – no, I can’t ‘prod’ – Statistics NZ are not willing to enter into further debate or discussion.

    I too am intriqued by the "99% of our responses came from the JavaScript version" statistic.

    Could this simply mean that users without JavaScript couldn’t start or complete the census forms in the first place? (a fair assumption considering in my own testing the census forms didn’t work without JavaScript).

    But if my assumption is wrong, then this does actually mean that 99% of ALL users had JavaScript?

    If true then why do the NZ E-Govt Web Guidelines (section 6.3.5 Scripting) stipulate that "…all information and services on a government website must be available whether or not scripting is available to the user…"?

    And if 99% of users have JavaScript then why are we (as web designers and developers) going through the expense of creating fallback versions for non-JavaScript functionality?

    Where do we draw the line?

Comments are closed.