3 ms·

I'm disappointed by their choice in site design and I'm sure it'll be infuriating to interact with for those with disabilities. It's a real wasted opportunity t

by e2le 6y ago

I'm disappointed by their choice in site design and I'm sure it'll be infuriating to interact with for those with disabilities. It's a real wasted opportunity to use this instead of something more battle tested and fit for purpose such as the design used by the gov.uk site. https://www.gov.uk/ https://www.gov.uk/ https://www.gov.uk/guidance/government-design-principles/ https://www.gov.uk/guidance/government-design-principles/

astrowilliam 6y ago
I see no infinite scrolling on https://whitehouse.gov/ https://whitehouse.gov/ It clearly has an end point and a footer. Also, the "briefing room" has pagination. Not sure what pages you are looking at.
- e2le 6y ago
  It would seem you're correct, faulty memory I suppose?
stack_underflow 6y ago
I really like that persistent link-background highlight effect when you click a link.
pottertheotter 6y ago
I'm not sure what I'm supposed to get from looking at gov.uk. For me, it was a negative experience, and I'm glad it's not used in the US.
- e2le 6y ago
  It might be a negative experience for you but I believe sacrificing elegance in favour of accessibility is a fair trade to make when building something that will be used by a diverse group of people. Accessible design is good design. Everything we build should be as inclusive, legible and readable as possible. If we have to sacrifice elegance - so be it. We’re building for needs, not audiences. We’re designing for the whole country, not just the ones who are used to using the web. The people who most need our services are often the people who find them hardest to use. Let’s think about those people from the start. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/government-design-principles#this-is-for-everyone https://www.gov.uk/guidance/government-design-principles#thi... In my personal experience however, using gov.uk has being a mostly pleasant experience and don't much care for opinionated "elegant" design.
Newkd 6y ago
I don't think that's a direct comparison. gov.uk looks closer to something like https://www.usa.gov/ https://www.usa.gov/, which is similarly functional. The Whitehouse website is more political and maybe would be closer to to Downing Street's page https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/prime-ministers-office-10-downing-street https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/prime-ministers-... which has more photos.
- e2le 6y ago
  I agree that might be a fairer comparison however I would argue is just as a accessible as https://gov.uk/ https://gov.uk/ (to be expected since it's the same site), I don't think the addition of images makes it less so.

by e2le 6y ago

astrowilliam 6y ago

I see no infinite scrolling on https://whitehouse.gov/ https://whitehouse.gov/ It clearly has an end point and a footer. Also, the "briefing room" has pagination. Not sure what pages you are looking at.

e2le 6y ago
It would seem you're correct, faulty memory I suppose?

stack_underflow 6y ago

I really like that persistent link-background highlight effect when you click a link.

pottertheotter 6y ago

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to get from looking at gov.uk. For me, it was a negative experience, and I'm glad it's not used in the US.

e2le 6y ago
It might be a negative experience for you but I believe sacrificing elegance in favour of accessibility is a fair trade to make when building something that will be used by a diverse group of people. Accessible design is good design. Everything we build should be as inclusive, legible and readable as possible. If we have to sacrifice elegance - so be it. We’re building for needs, not audiences. We’re designing for the whole country, not just the ones who are used to using the web. The people who most need our services are often the people who find them hardest to use. Let’s think about those people from the start. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/government-design-principles#this-is-for-everyone https://www.gov.uk/guidance/government-design-principles#thi... In my personal experience however, using gov.uk has being a mostly pleasant experience and don't much care for opinionated "elegant" design.

Newkd 6y ago

I don't think that's a direct comparison. gov.uk looks closer to something like https://www.usa.gov/ https://www.usa.gov/, which is similarly functional. The Whitehouse website is more political and maybe would be closer to to Downing Street's page https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/prime-ministers-office-10-downing-street https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/prime-ministers-... which has more photos.

e2le 6y ago
I agree that might be a fairer comparison however I would argue is just as a accessible as https://gov.uk/ https://gov.uk/ (to be expected since it's the same site), I don't think the addition of images makes it less so.