INTERVIEW 1 | Vol.
III No. 3, 2005
 |
| Google Maps, poster child for DHTML. |
The DHTML Dynamo
Jason Cranford Teague has served as a Senior Information Architect
for AOL, Lante, and iXL where has he designed Web sites for Virgin,
WebMD, Coca-Cola, CNN, BellSouth, DuPont, Kodak, and
The Technology Association of Georgia. We talked to Jason about his favorite development tool, DHTML, and his insights into interactivity.
Q: Interactive design is all about motivating the mouse hand. Why do we love clicking on and moving things in our computer screens?
Jason: Our brains are tuned to sense motion and assign special importance to those signals over static ones. And when that motion or change in an object is related to an action you perform, that feedback can be critical to understanding what is happening. Of course, like color in a design, too much motion in a design can overload these senses and become counterproductive.
Q: Flash gets a lot of press as the one-stop solution for interactive Web design, but DHTML is no lame duck technology. What makes DHTML a good idea for interactivity, and what advantages does it have over Flash?
Jason: Flash is great for video, animation, and even for creating online applications. However, it has several drawbacks, most notably in the development arena. DHTML and CSS are open standards and you can develop using any text editing application. Flash, on the other hand, requires the use of the Flash development tool, which is not only pricey, but also has a very steep learning curve. To make changes to your design requires Flash development skill as well. While most clients can change a bit of text on their DHTML Web site without bothering you, forget about it if the site is Flash-based.
Beyond that, for simple interactions (color changes, pop-ups, dynamic menus, etc...) using Flash is overkill. Setting these up using Dreamweaver or GoLive is a snap, and, even if you are doing it by hand, still easier than Flash.
Q: Do you think, as some have suggested, that will Flash eventually overtake HTML as the Web's primary medium?
Jason: Maybe if the development tool becomes sufficiently easy to use and more widely available (i.e. free) but I don't see that happening. Flash also has to address certain problems it still has with search engines, book marking, and other basic issues of convenience for Web browsers.
Another huge problem Flash has to overcome is one of perception. Most hard-core coders just don't like it. I know that a lot of their criticisms are not fair, but they exist, and if the programmers will not use Flash, you will not see it become ubiquitous.
Q: We’ve all been to sites where someone is obviously having way too much fun with DHTML. Everything’s blinking and moving, the mouse cursor is being followed around by a swarm of floating pixels or nested menus. When is too much DHTML too much?
Jason: This has to be determined on a case-by-case basis. The question is "does the dynamic interaction improve the user experience or just distract from it?" The goal of all good user interface design is not for the user to think how cool it is, but to make it feel so natural that they don't think about it at all.
Q: Critics of DHTML allege it is just a bunch of cheap parlor tricks. Is that unfair?
Jason: No, that's about right. But, out of necessity that's how they are presented. I show readers and students the "tricks" or pieces that they need to build into a complete user interface. I try to talk about why you use dynamic interaction to improve usability, but you have to teach the how-to by showing the components or else it just gets too complicated. Imagine trying to learn to be a mechanic by just looking at a car engine. If you don't break it down into parts, you will never see the whole thing works.
Q: Where do you see people doing really cool stuff right now with DHTML?
Jason: It's cropping up all over the Web now, mostly used to control menus and navigation. I love Panic.com, iht.com, and obviously the new Google Maps is the poster child for DHTML (maps.google.com).
Q: Flash is usually considered the king of Web animation, but you can do some animation with DHTML. Do you think that there’s room for further exploration of DHTML animation?
Jason: Honestly, no. You can animate some elements in DHTML for your interface, but beyond that, Flash is the better technology.
Q: Do you find that bandwidth and browser compatibility are still major obstacles for interactive Web sites?
Jason: No, not really. Developers now have a good understanding of what does and does not work in different browsers and can work around that. As for bandwidth, since DHTML is downloaded as text, it's pretty zippy. The main bottleneck is the end user’s processor speed, but this whammies Flash every bit as much as DHTML.
Q: So what major strides have you seen in Web interactivity in the past few years?
Jason: As developers become more accustomed to DHTML and legacy browsers have almost disappeared, you are seeing more and more use of dynamic (drop-down) menus, which I think is overall a good thing. You are also seeing a lot more Web based applications including dynamic capabilities for everything from resizing frames to flowing in content dynamically.
Q: Probably the biggest change we’ve seen on the Web in the last few years is the adoption of CSS for formatting. Do you think CSS’s formatting and layout control rival Flash’s at this point?
Jason: Yes. Flash has a major limitation in layout because it will only look the way the designer wants it too. Now, some will see this as an advantage, but to the end user who may need larger fonts or different colors if they are color-blind, this is a disadvantage.
In addition, making design changes with CSS is mind-bogglingly easy. With CSS I can completely redesign my entire Web site in a single night, while Flash might take me days or weeks.
That said, Flash will soon include strengthened CSS integration, allowing it greater control, so the question may be "Can Flash layout control really rival CSS?"
Q: What do you see in the future of Web interactivity?
Jason: Video is coming (still) but it has been slow. It won't be "TV," however. It will be a far more interactive experience where you can do thing (buy things, research things, comment on things) directly from the video. Beyond that, I think you will see Web experiences that are far less linear and more exploratory. We will be moving away from the newspaper style block design for pages, and you will see content that grows and shrinks as needed.
Most excitingly, though, computers are getting smarter and will not only be passively presenting the content, but become the trusted agent that recommends content you would like based on your past browsing. Rather than being a device simply receiving your commands, it will be truly interacting with you.
