<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="WordPress/2.9.2" -->
<rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Writing for the Web</title>
	<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog</link>
	<description>Useful, usable, accessible. The way web content should be.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:02:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	
	<item>
		<title>The struggle to publish useful content</title>
		<description><![CDATA[A common question in my web writing workshops is &#8216;how do we stop people publishing content we know no one will ever use?&#8217;
Poor publishing strategy in the public sector
Many of my clients are  public sector organisations. Most use content management systems and have staff from all over the organisation producing content. Publishing decisions are decentralised [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2010/03/the-struggle-to-publish-useful-content/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>The 5 Es of content usability</title>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve long been a fan of Whitney Quesenbery&#8217;s 5 Es of usability: effective, efficient, engaging, error tolerant and easy to learn. They&#8217;re a great way to explain what usability is — to make &#8216;easy to use&#8217; or &#8216;user friendly&#8217; more meaningful to clients, designers, developers.
I think the 5 Es can also be helpful for understanding [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2010/02/the-5-es-of-content-usability/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t make me read (useless words)</title>
		<description><![CDATA[If you&#8217;ve ever watched people read online, you&#8217;ll know they rarely read closely. Most people scan read most of the time.  When we ask them why, they tell us they just want the information they need and can&#8217;t be bothered with the rest.
One of the key issues is that so much of what gets published [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2010/01/dont-make-me-read-useless-words/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>A resolution for the new year: don&#8217;t forget the &#8216;C&#8217; in WCAG!</title>
		<description><![CDATA[With the likely adoption of WCAG 2.0 (the second version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) in Australia, organisations might be reviewing their website design and templates to meet the new standards in 2010. What they might forget though, is to check their content or update the skills and knowledge of those who produce it.
Lack [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2009/12/a-resolution-for-the-new-year-dont-forget-the-c-in-wcag/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>The trouble with page titles</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Page titles play a critical role on the web. The words we use in them are important for search engine optimisation. And well-written page titles help users sort through search results. However, too many pages have poor titles. The trouble is, we don't pay enough attention to them. ]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2009/10/the-trouble-with-page-titles/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Getting the planning process right</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Yesterday, a participant in my workshop said she felt there was no point planning content for a web page. In her experience, content approvers made so many changes to the content, that it barely resembled the original draft. Here's how you could deal with this ...]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2009/09/getting-the-planning-process-right/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Content is king? Not in WCAG 2.0!</title>
		<description><![CDATA[I gave a talk called &#8216;WCAG 2.0 for writers&#8217; at an accessibility forum recently. Preparing for it gave me the time to think some more about WCAG 2.0 — the new(ish) version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines.
As a web content specialist, I found the new guidelines disappointing. Content is the reason people use websites, [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2009/09/content-is-king-not-in-wcag-2-0/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Don’t publish online just because you can</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Publishing content online is relatively easy, fast and cheap. It’s one of the great things about the web, but also one of its downsides.
Too much content gets published online because it can, rather than because it should. Many websites heave and groan under the weight of too much low (or no) value content. Sadly, their [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2009/09/don%e2%80%99t-publish-online-just-because-you-can/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Defining and refining the purpose of a page</title>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve been reviewing and editing a lot of web content lately. Two current clients have large information-dense websites.  The content is produced by staff who are not professional writers, and they probably have little time to devote to writing— let alone planning.  But lack of planning has been a key problem.
Not enough planning
The first problem [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2009/09/defining-and-refining-the-purpose/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Two words that need to go under!</title>
		<description><![CDATA[I blame journalists for the growing use of these two awful words: &#8216;undertake&#8217; and &#8216;undergo&#8217;.
They litter newspaper headlines and articles:
&#8216;BHP to undertake study of rockfall mine&#8217;
&#8216;Optus to undertake major network upgrade&#8217;
I hear them on the evening news program almost every night:
&#8216;[some football player] will undergo tests to see if he has a stress fracture &#8230; [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.deyalexander.com.au/blog/2009/08/two-words-that-need-to-go-under/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>
