Startup idea for you: A button to make websites readable
These unreadable websites are especially painful for older people to deal with, since often their eyesight isn't as good as it used to be, and not being as tech savvy they are more easily confused by clutter and distractions. But the older demographic isn't a bad one for startups to target though, since one thing older people do have is money.
This startup idea is simple: create a bookmarklet (see, for example, http://www.google.com/bookmarks or http://ycombinator.com/bookmarklet.html) labeled "Readable". When the user gets to an unreadable page, they click on your "Readable" button in their bookmarks toolbar, and your site renders for them a readable version of the page that they're on.
You can include a small, tasteful header at the top of the page which includes a "Nope, not good!" button which gives you immediate feedback on which pages you are messing up when you try to render them in a readable fashion.
The core algorithm could be pretty simple: scan the page for the larger blocks of natural language text and display that. You don't have to be perfect, since if you miss anything of importance on the page the user can always click the "back" button to return to the original.
38 comments
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 77.5 ms ] threadjavascript:location.href = "http://www.google.co.uk/gwt/n?mrestrict=xhtml&u=" + location.href
It uses Google transcoder. I've only tried this in Firefox but it should work in IE too.
Displays content in a smaller, harder to read font than my default.
No button to give feedback "you messed up, I can't read your 'readable' version".
What you're suggesting at the core is basically what mobile transcoders already try to do, and any document classification system which needs to work out the most important content. It's a hard problem but there is plenty of thoughts out there to build on.
What you could do, even, is build a "meta-service" on top of something like Google's transcoder, where you pass the site into Google, then transcode /it's/ results to add a nicer style and the usability stuff like the feedback link. That would be a way to get something started pretty quickly, and you could use the feedback to see where Google isn't good enough, and therefore how to improve the service.
How would you make money though?
There is no business in this idea. It's a nice hack to work on in your spare time one afternoon.
http://21ccw.blogspot.com/2008/04/ie7-page-zoom-broken.html
I use one of those quite often - I think the "zap" one.
This is one of the reasons I think CSS should have been designed to be selected client side, not server side. (in other words, the CSS is selected by the user's browser options)h I should be able to decide how I view my websites, not some two-bit wanna-be web designer who thinks that black text on a black background makes GREAT contrast.
Ok, I exaggerate, and it's only rarely that I come across sites that are that horrid (that I still want to read, at least), but the point I'm making is that the theming should be in my hands.
If HTML was more semantic (<navbar><navitem.../></navbar>) it might even mean that mobile browsers don't have to work as hard trying to figure out what to do with massive sidebars that push the content down 30 scrollbar lengths; they just shove the <navbar> stuff into a dropdown menu, for example.
And thus ends my mini-rant about annoying style issues. Things are too embedded to change any time in the near future, even if everyone on the W3C completely agreed, but one can still dream...
I want to be able to -- for example -- on my blackberry, just drop the navigation into a button that I click on to show the links. I want the titlebar of a site to drop all the images -- don't even download them. Data is expensive in Canada.
I want to have the list of subscribers turn into a simple link to a new page, and only display the body of the article I'm reading. Anything else can be hidden in a menu in the browser (file->navigation->list of links, perhaps?)
And most importantly, I want to configure this on my end. I don't want to be constrained to the web designer's lame ideas about layout
I remember the early browsers (we're talking Mosaic and Netscape .9 here) having support for "navigational links" (although Wikipedia only talks about the link element, and doesn't have much information on this) rendered as a list of buttons across the top of the rendering frame. The only place I remember seeing this heavily used was on some site that Eolas (http://eolas.com/, yes, the plug-in patent Eolas, who I was tangentially involved with back in the mid-90s). I don't think it caught on because, really, internal, embedded links are more a more valuable, user-friendly, and web-page UI component. Additionally, I don't think many designers (or whatever you called people who built web pages back then) used them because it was kind of an obscure feature and it didn't get you as much control over the display as even a simple list of links did back then. It's really something that should be brought back, but it would most likely get abused anyway. The limited space used in the original rendering would make navigation more difficult, as the site author would consider different things to be important to navigate to than actual users would (for example, how often do you actually need instant access to the "about us" page?).
I find it tremendously useful to have a site's shitty design, layout and navigation help indicate early on, before I get frustrated with it, if the site is even worth visiting or coming back to. "Well, the person behind this site obviously doesn't want me to find anything on it, time to head somewhere else".
The thing is that CSS tries to separate layout and content, but you still have to encode the way that you want stuff to be laid out in the page at some level.
only works when "header" means the same thing across all pages. Since this sort of spec for shared meaning doesn't exist, CSS isn't transferrable between sites in practice.The thing is that CSS tries to separate layout and content, but you still have to encode the way that you want stuff to be laid out in the page at some level.
only works when "header" means the same thing across all pages. Since this sort of spec for shared meaning doesn't exist, CSS isn't transferrable between sites in practice.File->Print preview
Is this for real? You just described this very page.
I wouldn't pay money for this if some "startup" was selling it, but I did take the trouble to create an account so I could post a big WTF in ya face.