I like how the author included ways in which we can find free fonts because sometimes the software you use doesn't have the font you're looking for. Kilever is very helpful.

I agree that you need to have a purpose or mission to your site, otherwise you may not know what exactly you're trying to say and your site won't flow. It is important to brainstorm and figure out your purpose before anything.

First impressions are everything these days and what you wear is important when you want to give off a certain look or personality. The same goes for fonts. People are ging to judge your site based on the color scheme, fonts, etc. and each aspect are important to your site's look. It's interesting to think about it that way because some people may not see the importance of font selection.

It's hard to believe how recent the internet was developed. I've always had access to the internet growing up, it's hard to imagine life without it. Carrying around movable metal type seems insane, but it's interesting to learn that so much can change so quickly.

The comparison of Goldilocks and the 3 bears with finding the right fonts is very accurate because testing the way the fonts look together is very important.

I like how the author uses visual modes to help readers understand which fonts Kilever is referring to. Before I saw the fonts, I was going to look them up because I didn't fully understand the worded definition. This shows how important graphics are.

It can be very difficult to choose a font because there are so many to choose from. Often we have too much information (too many fonts) that we can't sort (decide) which (font) to use. In the previous article by Williams (“Guidelines for Designing and Evaluating the Display of Information on the Web.”), I noticed that as technical writers you should not put too much information on a site. However, if you do need that information, the author suggests to direct the reader's attention to the most important. Like Williams, Kilever wants to make the font decision easier by guiding designers to choose the most important fonts without much difficulty. Kilever helps designers sort through the information to get to the most important.

Graphic Design can be difficult when choosing a font. It can be too fun. It can be too serious. It all depends on what you're trying to do with the design.Find the most appropriate font and go from there.

Difference between typeface and font Typeface: is the design of the alphabet--the shape of the letters that make up the typestyle. The letters, numbers, and symbols that make up a design of type. So when you say “Arial” or “Goudy” you're talking about a set of letters in a specific style.

Font: is the digital file that contains/describes the typeface.

from: www.will-harris.com/font_vs_typeface.html

It's interesting to learn that there are different fonts that look better on the web. It makes sense after reading, but I didn't realize so much thought was put into it.

Pictures help to show an example relating to the text. Sometimes people may not understand a text. Sometimes people can explain something better in a picture. When necessary put a picture (4.4)

The author says that we should only use images on our site if they relate to the information you are providing. I agree. This is funny because I am looking back to the time when everyone was on Myspace and they would decorate their sites with any and everything. The contrast from colorful Myspace to the basic default white background of Facebook was shocking to me at first. I wondered why everyone switched over, but I realized it was easier. No one had the time to constantly decorate and design their sites. No one had the time to sort through a person's Myspace page because a lot of them were hard to sort through and unorganized. So Facebook's simple design helps us as readers.

The author says that type in all uppercase and non-uniform spacing between words decreases reading speed. That's interesting because most novels are justified to where the text aligns both left and right. I am assuming that this issue applies mainly to online sites.

Growing up, we would often use any and all texts that were funky and pretty. Now it seems that basic fonts are the best way to go. Readability is the most important when you are looking to show an audience.

The author mentions that sites should either be white or light blue. I realized that most sites with a lot of traffic usually have a white background. All text books, novels, etc. usually have a white background.

The color, position, size, isolation, complexity and tonal contrast are all major aspects in guiding the reader to the most important information. These days, there is so much information to sort through, readers don't want to sort through irrelevant sites.

The author of this article is trying to inform potential site designers how to improve the effectiveness of their website. The author goes over legibility, arrangement of elements, typography, visuals, icons, and animation.

And Williams gives specific examples of effective and ineffective website designs.

Spatial arrangement can affect how a reader may group information together. Group items by their color or by grid lines. If you do not separate some information by a good amount of space or a line, the reader may become confused. The reader may also group similar colors together because they may think they relate.

"Design, in its most simple sense, is an attempt to visually convey the logical, functional, or natural relationship that exist among the elements in an information display."

Williams is absolutely right in that the viewer will often look at the organization of a page before they go to read it. If the page isn't visually appealing the reader won't be inclined to keep reading. The reader will assume that the content is too complicated to understand.

The author goes on to say that "Good design reveals structure..." The reader needs to be able to follow the information and they don't want to have to struggle to understand the content.

Williams mentions that "the characteristics...to be of interest to the site visitor are so small that the picture is virtually useless." I think that a lot of people put an almost irrelevant item/picture/text on a site. The item usually doesn't have a purpose, so I never understand why someone would use the item. Information on a site should be related to the topic, otherwise the reader may leave the site.

I completely agree with this statement. Why do we insist that bodies should behave in a certain way, should do things a certain way? There are thousands of people with said "disabilities" and it's not even their fault that they aren't able to do everything an abled person can. Disabled person(s) should always be kept in mind when developing a new technology.

Crowdsourcing is such an amazing development. There should be more people who can find the time to help people without being paid. There are good people like this everywhere.

To grow as a society we have to uplift each other and that should mean including our disabled people. We should be able to provide for those people without much difficulty. There are many programs to help with that. People have to realize that anyone can become disabled and they would not be happy if they couldn't access a form of digital communication because they weren't considered.

Sometimes it is hard to accommodate everyone. When developing or selling products, you should have a target audience to create the best possible product and campaign for the audience you feel would buy the product. When the audience is broad or large, it's hard to appeal to everyone. I would feel that developing a website would be similar. I am sure it is difficult to ensure everyone can easily access your site without much difficulty. Especially because some people are more tech-saavy than others and people have different needs.

People don't always understand that technology is really just creating easier ways for us to function in society. When there is something that we don't want to do or something that is repetitive or non-engaging we may develop a software or technology to do it for us or make it easier for us. We would basically be doing the same thing for disabled people in developing technology that helps them, so why not include them in the process.

Humans are not open to change. It takes a long time to incorporate a new technology in society. There are thousands of new developments and products being created, but because people may see them as unnecessary or unintelligible. If something is different we reject it and technology companies aren't inclined to put out different or new things because it will usually fail so they usually just improve what we already have.

This is honestly my biggest pet peeve with society. I understand that there is usually a standard that we naturally follow as human beings, but I don't feel it is fair that we deem one way as the right way. Everyone is not the same; everyone thinks differently; everyone is raised differently so everyone shouldn't be expected to do things a certain way. In WIlliams' experience with the woman who can understand speech spoken at a much faster rate, he states that can't understand and has to ask the woman to slow the speech's speed, yet he is not labeled disabled.

This article is about the neglect towards towards disabled people in regards to communication with digital information. The author hopes to influence people to incorporate digital information to where a disabled person can easily access the internet just as an abled person would. Universal design means that a product is usable to the greatest extent possible by everyone and the author hopes that the internet will one day have a universal design that doesn't leave disabled people neglected. The author comes up with a few websites like Wordpress, Drupal, Omeka, MediaWiki and Joomla that have easily accessible tools for disabled people to use (CMS). There are generous people who dedicate their time to help with software, products and such, known as crowdsourcers. The government has some laws that force companies to insure that their buildings, streets, etc. are accessible to disabled people, but there is not any regulation for websites.

There are so many different technologies these days that are beneficial to society that people do not know about. Even the talk-to-text feature is something just now becoming popular, but it has been out for a long time. You can easily speak your message and your phone, tablet, or computer will type it out for you. It seems people are just now getting used to it to where it is becoming a social norm. This reminds me of when I was about 13 years old when wi-fi wasn't popular in homes (well maybe not for my age group) and my peers wouldn't understand the concept of wireless internet. When I would ask about wi-fi they wouldn't know what I was talking about and weren't open to the change. I've had many experiences like that because I am fairly up to date with technology.

In the text, Williams mentioned most disabled people are older, low income individuals, which makes it harder to accommodate those users because for one, there won't be very many using the tools because they are older and not so tech-saavy. Of course, there are chances that they may come across the site, but it won't be as frequently as abled people. And also, the fact that it is expensive to create software or even hire translators will discourage people to try to gather this technology for the disabled. It would be nice if we could help everyone, but sometimes the resources aren't there. Unfortunately, if there is not a huge demand for such services, people won't be persuaded to create special products for the disabled.

With the acceptance of UD failing, we can understand how to incorporate it into society. Nothing is perfect. Similar to stereotyping and prejudice, we have to accept that people will be biased no matter what. We can try until we are red in the face, but we will always have a prejudice towards people. We simply must accept it and hope to catch ourselves when we make these judgments and get to know the person. Hopefully we can inact that concept with UD.

The more we work with these people, the better off we are. I can't help but think of Stephen Hawking and how he is able to function in society with the help of technology. Although, he is not one hundred percent able bodied, he is still valued in society because he has technology that allows him to speak. Without that technology, we would not have known how smart and beneficial he is to society. I am sure there are so many people who could benefit society but they do not have the means or access. With UD, we can try to make that happen.

I believe everyone has value in society and if we do not allow them the same access that any abled-bodied person would have does not seem fair. It is a major setback because of their condition. If we do not even the playing field, they will face much more difficulty and will be seen as lesser human beings, all because society makes it so. The fact that the author says that there is no such thing as a text that meets everyone's needs is true, but we should work towards a text that includes as many people as we can.

I completely agree with this statement. We should all be working to improve the accessibility of our digital communication. We all grow old, we could potentially get into an unfortunate accident to where we become disabled, anything can happen and we should be working at improving technology. Whether it is a suggestion or developing an entirely new software.

This article is disproving the idea of UD. The first author, Jonathan mentions that UD is a myth and inaccessibility can be socially productive. We can try to include disabled people in the way we function in society but we also have to accept their differences. The author goes on to discuss ASL and some of the inaccessible features such as lack of audio or captions in video clips. The second author, Rick is a disabled academic who speaks from personal experiences. He says that UD and the resistance to digital tools both posit a universal subject; and DH needs to balance its embrace of UD with further attention to the particulars of embodied experience.He goes on to say that everyone is different and with UD, we are basically trying to get everyone to be the same or operate the same.

The world will never be perfect and the sooner we understand that, the closer we will be at achieving a better society. We have to accept our differences and go from there. I don't think we should label disabled people as disabled. I think there should be a better term to describe their differences because it makes them seem as if they are lesser. The author says "disabled/extraordinary/eccentric bodies," as another way of phrasing the challenges people must face. It's a better way of phrasing their differences.

It is important that we accommodate for disabled people. Not everyone wants to ask for another person's help. Everyone wants some sort of independence and to completely rely on someone else can be hurt one's pride.

Unfortunately, technology is imperfect and can fail us so sometimes people have to ask for help and that is fine, but there should be an effective way of providing assistance for those disabled.

In the previous article by George Williams I mentioned that if you don't have a specific audience, it becomes extremely hard to reach people. To be forced to accommodate for all audiences can confuse the audience on what your purpose is.

I've always wondered how people who were blind could go see a movie or video or something visual. I know there are ways of speaking about what is going on in a scene like a book would describe something. However, I don't necessarily think there would be a completely genuine accessible way for blind people to watch a film, which would mean that Universal design is a Utopian concept.

It is almost impossible to please and accommodate everyone. It would be lovely to include everyone in all digital communication, but there are so many different factors that can affect the way a website functions.

This statement refers to Schryer's article in which the students didn't have the literacy skills anticipated by the professors at the veterinary school. Students don't practice their writing skills as often as they should and this hurts them in the end without them realizing it. I didn't even realize the importance of writing skills in the medical field and after reading these articles I see that strong literacy skills are important in all fields. Mediocre won't always pass because if people cannot communicate with you effectively, they won't want to work with you.

Sometimes we need to understand how technology will affect technical communication for the improvement of our society and not just the current situation we are in. These technological improvements are improving the world as a whole.

We rely on technology too much to where if the internet stopped working, we would not be able to function for awhile. It would take us awhile to recover from the network failure.

WIll the teaching of the specific softwares help the majority of students with their goals? It could be beneficial to few, but it may not be to the majority.

Often, we don't realize how we switch tools and resources because technology is evolving so fast and not everyone will want to use the same software and it would take too much time to repeatedly go over different softwares.

This is similar to what we discussed in class. We mentioned that different platforms or genres of writing is still considered writing. Just because the way it was communicated is different doesn't mean it isn't writing.

Communicators and Professionals have developed due to the advancement of technological. The easiest, tedious work can now be accomplished by computers that way we don't have to worry about it.

The author is trying to promote growth in the field of technology by developing awareness of the changes. If you educate the people, they are more inclined to understand be content or even excited about change.

The way technology is viewed was how it fit into what was going on in that moment and no one seemed to be concerned about how far advanced technology could bring them. I think we still have these views because we are stuck on how things are supposed to be and change is hard to grasp.

Technology is growing larger and changing more every day. Since technical writing first came out so much has changed, which most likely means that there is not just one way of doing things. It will take sometime before technical writing is concrete.

Reading this article helped me understand the importance of the consultation/study they received by the author. The school will better understand the student's issues that they should or should not address.

Referring to p. 204 2nd paragraph; the professors don't seem to realize what their students have to go through on a daily basis regarding their schoolwork The professors were most likely trained well in English writing because of the many years of school they've had to perfect their skills.

In the beginning of the article, where there is dialogue between Dr. L and the researcher and Dr. L is "appalled by the techniques students use in answering questions..."

Dr. L doesn't seem to understand why students don't do well regarding their literacy skills and I think it has to do with the fact that students aren't as inclined to put a lot of effort into their writing because it's repetitive and they are busy with their many assignments.

On page 208, the author mentions that Miller's definition of genre was contradictory and could not be resolved. There are many different definitions of genre mentioned in this article. Charles Bazerman defined genre as a "sociopsychological category which we use to recognize and construct typified actions within typified situations.

I like how the author (Miller) simplified the definition of genre by saying it is a "frequently traveled path or way of getting symbolic action done either by an individual social action or group of actors," whereas we defined it as a way of figuring out what will or will not work, in class.

Schryer made the definition sound story-like instead of a basic description.

p. 206 first 2 paragraphs

Dorthy Smith goes on to say that records "constitute organization, but are also constituted by them and function as mechanisms of control" and "systematically exclude women." It's interesting to mention this because the way certain words are organized or written can effect the way the reader views that person in the medical record. The judgement may impact the way the doctor or nurse treats the patient.

p. 205 2nd paragraph mentions Dorthy E. Smith who was a feminist and marxist who received the lifetime sociology award. Smith is a very credible person to mention in the paragraph relating to the judgement of the patient's records that medical practitioners will see.

http://www.peoplesworld.org/feminist-and-marxist-dorothy-smith-receives-lifetime-sociology-award/

Two types of triangulation were used in the study (between-method triangulation and within-method triangulation), in which included "interviews, observation, document collection," etc. This relates to what we discussed in class about the many genres that we defined as a loose set of rules to distinguish one thing from another thing. This could range from novels, websites, brochures, etc. So triangulation methods may include many different genres or ways to go about the study.

Schryer asks 3 questions to the veterinary college that are very important. The questions gather relevant background information before consulting the college. They were "radical and contextual" questions to avoid blaming the students automatically.

When Schryer quotes Dr. L and says "...they are graded more for their observations than for their literacy skills," he believes the medical students should be concerned with their writing. I completely understand where Dr. L is coming from, but at the same time, it isn't required for medical students to take the top literacy and English courses so I don't see why that would be expected. However, there should definitely be some courses they should take in order for the medical students to be able to communicate with their clients and co-workers once they get into the field. A solution would be to incorporate courses that would be beneficial to their literacy skills.

reading this article helps me understand the importance of the consultation/study they received by the author. The school will better understand the student's issues that they should or should not address and where they can improve.

referring to p. 204 2nd paragraph; the professors don't understand their students and how much they have to go through and to add on proper english writing on top of what they already have to learn would probably overwhelm them whereas the professors were most likely trained well in english writing because of the many years of school and training they've had to perfect their skills.

In the beginning of the article, where there is dialogue between Dr. L and the researcher and Dr. L is "appalled by the techniques students use in answering questions..."

Dr. L doesn't seem to understand why students write in such ways and I think it has to do with the fact that students aren't as inclined to put a lot of work into their writing because it takes much more time when you can get it done easily with the just the bare minimum.