(W3C, 2004) and included in the GUI based
software.
The styles of the text characters are yet suggested
to satisfy usability guidelines: Times, Verdana,
Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica.
To ensure perfect readability, even the size of the
characters can be chosen among a minimum of 8 pts,
Figure 5: The fast style prototyper. In this environment
the web developer can choose some presentation aspects
about the page areas drawn before. The developer can set
text and background colours to ensure a good reading. The
colours can also be chosen according to the sensations that
the site must transmit, depending on the culture of the
typical Internet user. On the left the created styles can be
associated with the page areas drawn in the prototyping
tool.
10 pts (preferable), 12 pts for people with visual
deficiencies or bigger ones. Since at the moment the
human computer interaction is not as complete as in
real world, every web object must be carefully
chosen to make the final user feel fine. So it is
important to choose colours correctly to
communicate the right sensations. Our software
helps the web developer by giving him the
correspondence between every colour and its
meaning in various cultures (western, oriental, ...).
That is very useful if the web site is not a world site,
but a regional site or a site for a specific group of
users.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The idea to include the colours constraint for text
and background proves to be valuable, since,
according to a web analysis, at least the 33% of the
observed pages doesn't satisfy the colours
requirements. Forcing (or warning) the web
developer to follow usability guidelines, produces
better web presentations, and shorter release times.
However it must be kept in mind that the presence of
usability professionals might still be a necessity, as
in complex cases the software can only help the
human decisions.
The code generation has been thought to be
based on HTML plus CSS, since the CSS and the
box model are an easy way to generate the page
areas drown in the fast prototyping environment.
The tool under evaluation, and the
methodologies illustrated, will improve the Internet
users satisfaction and will shorten the web sites
time-to-market with advantages for developers and
clients.
The EUWI CASE tool still needs to be properly
tested for a final release. The usability
methodologies (the ones that could be automated)
have been identified, specified and included in our
tool.
REFERENCES
Nielsen, J., 2003. Designing Web Usability: The practice
of simplicity, New Riders Press.
Fraternali, P., 1999. Tools and Approaches for developing
Data-Intensive Web Applications: A Survey, ACM
Computing Surveys, Vol. 31, No. 3, September 1999.
Becker, S. A., Berkemeyer, A., 2002. Rapid Application
Design and Testing of Web Usability, Multimedia
IEEE, Vol.9, Issue:4, Oct.-Dec. 2002, Pages: 38-46.
Ceri, S., Fraternali, P., Bongio, A., Brambilla, M., Comai,
S., Matera, M., 2003. Progettazione di dati e
applicazioni per il web, McGraw-Hill, Milano.
Internet: http://www.webml.org
Internet: http://www.webratio.com
Newman, M. W., Landay, J. A., 2000. Sitemaps,
Storyboards, and Specifications: A Sketch of Web Site
Design Practice, Symposium on Designing Interactive
Systems, Proceedings of the Conference on Designing
Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods,
and Techniques, New York City, United States,
Pages:263-274, ACM Press.
Hammar Cloyd, M., 2001. Designing User-Centered Web
Applications in Web Time, Software IEEE, Vol.18,
Issue:1, Jan.-Feb. 2001, Pages:62-69.
Conallen, J.,2003. Building Web Applications with UML,
Addison-Wesley Object Technology Series, Boston.
W3C, 2004. Techniques for Accessibility Evaluation and
Repair Tools. (n.d.). Retrieved November 8, 2004,
from: http://www.w3.org/TR/AERT
WEBIST 2005 - WEB INTERFACES AND APPLICATIONS
376