<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>NPSC Blog &#187; assistive</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/tag/assistive/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog</link>
	<description>The public affairs practice in New Zealand Government</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2010 22:27:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>NZ newspaper sites relaunched</title>
		<link>http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2006/12/15/nz-newspaper-sites/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2006/12/15/nz-newspaper-sites/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 2006 21:10:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason Ryan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Communications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web standards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accessibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assistive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[newspapers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog2/?p=27</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This morning both the New Zealand Herald and the Stuff websites (the Fairfax empire) were reskinned, and in the case of Stuff, relaunched with a new CMS. So, after a quick once over, what are my initial impressions?
Well, the obvious point to make is that they both look remarkably similar. Both have gone for CSS [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="thumb" src="http://psnetwork.org.nz/blog/wp-content/themes/npsc2/images2/newspaper.jpg" title="Your morning read" alt="Newspaper and coffee cup" />This morning both the <a class="external" href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/" title="Herald website">New Zealand Herald</a> and the <a class="external" href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/" title="Fairfax website">Stuff</a> websites (the Fairfax empire) were reskinned, and in the case of Stuff, relaunched with a new <acronym title="Content management System">CMS</acronym>. So, after a quick once over, what are my initial impressions?</p>
<p>Well, the obvious point to make is that they both look <em>remarkably</em> similar. Both have gone for <acronym title="Cascading Style Sheets">CSS</acronym> based layouts (which, in terms of a web standards based approach, is commendable) that use the same background and three column spread. It is not surprising that the Stuff site looks like its Australian stablemates, the <a class="external" href="http://www.smh.com.au/" title="SMH website">Sydney Morning Herald</a> and the <a class="external" href="http://www.theage.com.au/" title="The Age website">Melbourne Age</a>, but the NZ Herald&#8217;s similarity is odd. I put it down not to industrial espionage &ndash; which would make a terrific story, but to a (more prosaic) failure of imagination&#8230;</p>
<h2>Technical detail</h2>
<p>Both sites homepages are on the hefty side, Stuff weighing in at 219KB and NZH a bloated 381KB. The Herald page load, at least this morning, is a shocker. You could finish your breakfast and the hard copy of the paper before this thing loaded&#8230;</p>
<p>Neither homepage <a class="external" href="http://validator.w3.org/" title="W3C validator">validates</a>, but the Stuff website fails <em>really</em> badly. Why would you build a site using CSS and then still include <code>&lt;font&gt;</code> tags? It is just shoddy web development. Period. Both sites are missing some <code>&lt;alt&gt;</code> tags but, given newspaper sites reliance on posting images, it comes as no shock.</p>
<h2>Overall</h2>
<p>The improvements to the Stuff website are both the most welcome &ndash;only because the old site was such a disgrace&ndash; and the most disappointing. Sure, not everyone cares about the quality of the markup (except those people using <a class="external" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assistive_technology" title="Wikipedia: assistive technology">assistive technologies</a>), but you would think the developers would have taken a little more professional pride in their work. What they <em>really</em> screwed up, however, was missing the opportunity to implement <acronym title="Really Simple Syndication">RSS</acronym> feeds for the site. The Herald site offers an array of feeds and, for that reason alone is &ndash; from a user perspective, a far superior site.</p>
<p>Fairfax don&#8217;t offer RSS feeds on their Australian sites, so I guess it is part of their business strategy to <em>force</em> their readers to the site to ingest the advertising there. Smart move. Why would you want to cater for your audience when it is the advertisers that are clearly your cherished relationship? Fairfax execs have obviously yet to be won over by the whole Web 2.0 thing.</p>
<p>So, what do you think about the new sites?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psnetwork.org.nz/blog/2006/12/15/nz-newspaper-sites/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
