New Site: Moved to WordPress CMS

We moved our site this morning to a new domain and it’s now running on WordPress. After a few issues with the redirect that central IT had to fix, it seems to be running smoothly.

There is still a lot of work to be done in terms of cleaning up content, especially since there are still many pages using tables for layout purposes (insert big cringe here). I also still need to finish going through the accessibility reports (only did the front page so far), and writing guidelines for staff. Training has still yet to happen for staff as well (since we focused on getting the site up first).

Spot the Differences

The website has actually changed very little on the front end. Think you can spot all the differences?

old home pagenew home page

I’ve made an answer key if you care to play (red = added/removed, blue = moved, orange = small difference).

Rationale

I think most people will understand the rationale in going to the CMS. The move in this case was much more for internal reasons, primarily so that staff can update pages. Of course, this actually should have a positive impact (at least in theory) as staff will be assigned pages and be responsible for keeping them current. Putting this system in place should also free up time of those involved in maintaining the website to do other things.

Finding a WordPress Image Slider Carousel Plugin (Again)

UPDATE: Please consider not using a carousel at all: Death to the Website Carousel

I previously posted on this same topic not all that long ago, but that slider broke when we updated to the most recent WordPress (3.4) and since new plugins come out all the time, I thought I’d just find a new one. Continue reading “Finding a WordPress Image Slider Carousel Plugin (Again)”

The Ends do not Justify the Means: The Necessity of Code Review

Hopefully this post does not sound like just a rant as I admit that this post has come up from my frustrations from using other people’s work, but I think this is particularly symptomatic of areas where there are not always IT experts, as is the case with many libraries. I also do not boast that I always know what I’m doing, but that’s why I think it’s invaluable to have some kind of code review process.

Making it Simple

As a general rule, better to make things as simple as possible rather than using complex methods if they both achieve the same things. I’ve been told that simple and clean code is the best kind of code.

There may be efficiency concerns involved, but then that seems to be left behind in the cases I’m talking about anyway. (Case in point, our website had 5+ CSS files, not all which had clear purposes, many of which were overwriting each other’s classes, which I had to rework into two files.)

Document and Comment

While some of the simple things might be obvious and self-explanatory, I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything over documented/commented in the ‘real world’ (as opposed to school work), so more is (generally) better. I think it’s doubly important where the creation of a product/tool might be outsourced, but the maintenance of it is done in house (as frequently seems to happen), that the code can be understood by a new/beginner programmer-type person.

Too often I have looked at code recently and thought “what does this do?” or “how many pages does it affect?” While I admit that it’s not always easy to know what or how much needs to be documented, because you don’t always know who will look at it in the future and things you write yourself tend to make sense, but do at least a minimal amount of documentation and commenting.

On a side note, do not name files or functions after yourself (one former student’s name is now unforgettable for that reason and this was created months before I started).

Get Feedback

Ideally, there is someone who is an actual programmer on your team or in your unit who you can ask to take at least a quick look over what you’ve done and give you feedback on whether you’ve done it correctly. If there’s no one ‘inside’, consider asking someone on the ‘outside’.

Within a team or unit, if there is more than one programmer-savvy person, consider establishing a Review/Feedback step in the process as you typically see before code commits (if this doesn’t already exist of course).

If you really can’t get feedback from someone else, then much like editing your own writing, step back from it (for, preferably, a couple of days) and look at it with fresh eyes and ask yourself some of the important questions, but namely:

would someone else be able to step in and easily understand what your code does?

Supervising Students

I believe that all the above points apply when working with students too. It’s okay if you’re not a programmer. At least take a brief look at the code, see if commenting is done, ask about the general process/framework, ask if they think a beginner programmer would be able to understand their code easily, etc. If you ask, it will at least make him/her think about it!

My Point

The end product does not mean it is what you want. Other people also need to be able to maintain and customize/modify. This all seems so obvious, but I think it bears reminding sometimes.

Ryerson Going Google with Google Apps: The Run Down

UPDATE: See my more recent blog post if you’re looking for my supplement materials (to the Ryerson Google site) on sync’ing Google Apps.

I attended a session to address concerns with privacy and security concerns in adopting Google apps at the university. Half of the session was actually a general how to protect your own information and your responsibilities as a user. I’ll focus more on the project itself than the second half since there’s a ton of resources about protecting your information already out there.

Google Apps

For the implementation, Sada Systems will be dealing with the actual implementation and migration. Roll out will be done in stages starting with the first four, and the rest will have to go through the evaluation process first.

  • mail
  • calendar
  • docs/drive
  • contact
  • chat
  • mobile
  • sites
  • app engine
  • plus
  • video

Options

  • Faculty and students will have an opt-in option for mail.
  • Staff, however, will be migrated (i.e. not optional).
  • Everyone will be moved to calendar in order to be rid of Groupwise (yay!).
  • Everyone will still keep their @ryerson.ca so there is no change in the email address itself.

Timeline & Next Steps

In a nutshell, there is none, and that’s because the legal agreement hasn’t actually been signed yet.

Once it does get signed, then alpha testing will be done with the CCS group (central IT) and then beta testing with a larger community group. They’re still hoping for a fall rollout though.

Legal Concerns

Most privacy and security concerns revolved around lawful access and warrantless searches with storing data in the US. It was explained that basically, it doesn’t make a difference. Canada has similar legislation and the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (with many countries) is a binding agreement to share information under lawful access or warrantless searches, which means the same thing will happen if your data is stored in any of the countries part of the agreement.

Privacy & Data Protection

To alleviate some concerns, the organizing group assured everyone that a Privacy Impact Assessment is done using the international standard, Privacy in Design and ensures that there are no breaches to:

Additionally,

  • all incoming mail goes through the university servers first
  • not opting in means that email stays on the university servers
  • opting in means the emails are then sent and stored on Google servers
  • students emails will not be visible in the global (internal?) address list
  • minimum identifying information (username, name) is used for authentication
  • drives/docs is private by default
  • calendars display only free/busy by default (as in Groupwise right now)

As I mentioned, in the second half of the presentation, we were all reminded that most email/information/data breaches are due to users, not email systems or hardware, and that email is not secure (although they’re looking into encryption for sensitive information). We got the usual spiel on our responsibilities not to include sensitive information in emails, having secure passwords, being careful of phishing, making sure websites use https, etc.

We’ll see how quickly they get things going, but I’m sure many staff will be happy to get rid of Groupwise (which likes to crash at least a couple of times a week and cancels shut down) at the very least.

For more updates, there is a dedicated blog for project updates.

OLITA Digital Odyssey 2012: Outside-In – Approach to Inclusiveness

The presenter spoke quite quickly,and there was a lot of points on the slides, so I didn’t catch everything. I also focused more on design aspects than anything else.

Defining Inclusive Design

  • design that is inclusive of the full range of human diversity with respect to ability, language, culture, gender, age, and other forms of human difference
  • designing for diversity

Digital Exclusion

  • access to online systems no longer an option
  • estimated social and economic cost of digital exclusion
  • required for government, commerce, education ,etc.

Bridging the Gap

  • developers design for the typical or average user
  • Assistive technology (AT) is intended to bridge the gap to reach anyone that requires alternative access systems
  • this bridge is inadequate: only some disabilities and only reaches a few countries

Specialized Assistive Technology

  • 28% of the world
  • rising in cost
  • decreasing in availability

Accessibility Legislation

  • necessary foundation for systematic change
  • AODA groundbreaking approach to legislating accessibility
  • but currently
    • hard to update
    • hard to keep current
    • accessibility requirements seen to constrain innovation
    • fear of implementing new technologies
    • one-size-fits-all solution

Global Consensus

  • need new approach
  • especially with an aging population, which needs more alternatives as they grow older

True Accessibility

Need New Approach

  • more inclusive of full diversity of learners
  • more relevant to educational demands
  • more timely and continuously renewable
  • contextualized or embedded in learner’s context