Will FIRST teams start using Web 2.0 styles?

[Michael Hill]

I know that Web 2.0 isn't a convention per say, just more or less a styling standard that mostly includes large text, big headers, simple, etc. I'm just wondering if FIRST teams are taking the seemingly unnecessary leap into Web 2.0 styling.

[Christian]

Well, I don't know about web 2.0 styling; we do use some elements, but very subtly. But, web 2.0 as an UI springboard (springboard was the codename for that year), is very apparent. We used AJAX to read several RSS feeds and have them displayed on the top.

http://www.roboticks408.com
(Our site is configured for a robotics competition called BEST a couple of years ago, it will be updated for the 2007 season).

As for teams wanting to go into web 2.0 styling, it would be tough. Generally, web 2.0 (take Flickr for example) isn't... well, FIRST. It's very plain, very "contrasty." FIRST websites usually are very graphically involved and very un-2.0. If some team can create a web2.0 inspired site (like FIRSTr), maintaining a FIRST identity and web 2.0 identity, it should be very interesting and do very well in competition. I happen to like the design of FIRSTr very much, and as someone stated earlier, its very fun and easy to use. There is no reason why 2.0 styling shouldn't be used (except that it's conventionally used for social sites), it would just take a lot of work make the balance of FIRST and 2.0.

http://firstr.org/

[chris31]

We currently dont have a website up and running. I do have a AJAX web 2.0ish site I am working on. I think the whole web 2.0 designs look nice and more teams will probably switch to something like that later on.

[Tri_Lam]

whats web 2.0???

[ThomasP]

Originally Posted by Tri_Lam

whats web 2.0???

A lot of people use the term to refer to websites that use AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript And XML) but it's really just a website that delivers a nice user interface, provides ways for the user to interact with the website, and usually involves some sort of socializing system. A web1.0 website would be some website that just delivers content to the user.

You can find more information at... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web2.0

[Cjmovie]

I think it all depends on how the site itself is meant to be used. IMHO, as I hope many of you will agree, content should drive the interface, not the other way around. What I'm saying is, I hope no team gets blinded and goes crazy with Web 2.0 "goodness" to the point that the content is diminished by it.
I don't intend, for instance, to do much "Web 2.0" for our team's site right now. Why? Well, for one, nothing about our team really matches the "Web 2.0 look", which is a clear, shiny graphics interface from everything so far I've seen. Our team's logo is a saw blade, and our colors that of dirty metal. So I think a flattened, dark-Grey layout fits best.
As for the Web 2.0 interfaces....If used properly, it could be a big plus. But I'm not doing anything yet. I think the first place we'll start seeing things like this creep in are photo galleries.

[GRaduns340]

I agree that to some extent the content is more important, but for anyone who is going to seriously pursue web devlopment, from a business standpoint it is important to deliver the content that the customer wants to see. Throwing information doesn't do much good to a customer who wants to be able to go on and buy quickly. At the same time, you want someone who is looking for deeper information to be able to find it with ease. It's about making it easy for the customer in the long run, and even if it doesn't apply as much to FIRST it's still very good practice.

[fimmel]

im currently working on adding a web 2.0 feel and style to team 885's website http://www.thegreenteam885.org/ pm comments and suggestions about it to me.

/forest

[Uberbots]

Will first teams start using Web 2.0? oh god i hope not...

i mean, the AJAX might have a use in applications where user-friendliness is important (e.g. calendars), but the overall simplicity of the graphic style of this genre simply would not fit a FIRST website. These websites need a media driven base because they are trying to convey their image- something that web2.0 is used to mask over and not portray.

What i would like to see is less of a leap into Web2.0 and more of a leap into good, flowing, and contemporary design.

[Cjmovie]

Originally Posted by Cjmovie

As for the Web 2.0 interfaces....If used properly, it could be a big plus. But I'm not doing anything yet. I think the first place we'll start seeing things like this creep in are photo galleries.

If you want to call XMLHTTPRequest Web 2.0, I've done what I said I would. The gallery on our team's website now searches either like a "normal" search system, or automatically. If you start typing and wait for it to load, it'll show search results automatically.
http://d5robotics.org/Content/

[Ryan Dognaux]

I still don't think you'll see many pages with a true Web 2.0 style. What I do think you'll see is very slick and somewhat technical pages with a lot of content, which is what FIRST seems to be looking for too.

Personally, I'm a fan of adding various Javascripts and dhtml things to make a page more dynamic. Check out Lightbox JS or Lightbox JS v2.0. In my opinion, things like this are very cool and add a lot to the page without a lot of work involved.

[SamC]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

Lightbox JS or Lightbox JS v2.0. In my opinion, things like this are very cool and add a lot to the page without a lot of work involved.

Really? I don't really like scripts like that for 1 reason, you can't easily move on to the next picture, plus it takes about 3 seconds to load! But yes, they do look cool!

[chris31]

Originally Posted by SamSofa330

Really? I don't really like scripts like that for 1 reason, you can't easily move on to the next picture, plus it takes about 3 seconds to load! But yes, they do look cool!

In Lightbox 2 once you in "image view mode" there is a next button in the top right if you hover your mouse over the image.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by chris31

In Lightbox 2 once you in "image view mode" there is a next button in the top right if you hover your mouse over the image.

Indeed there is It's very cool, you don't have to exit out of the image viewing or anything like that. And really it takes about as long to open and have an image load anyway.

[Cjmovie]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

Indeed there is It's very cool, you don't have to exit out of the image viewing or anything like that. And really it takes about as long to open and have an image load anyway.

I personally don't like it all that much. I like to see the image, not a fancy animation. It looks good the first few times, but then it gets annoying. Having to close a "popup" just to finish browsing the page? Not my thing. Sure it's small, but it's still a big annoyance with me.

I like things when they look good, but they don't get in my way or hinder my ability to browse a website. Things like this just slow me down when I'm trying to get the information I want.

One last thing I don't like is how it treats large images in a small window...And window resizing.

I think I wouldn't mind so much about something like this if it didn't cover up what I was currently doing on the page.