This is the story of a guy and a project. In that project he’s run into the widget. He’s never really had to accommodate distributable embed-able widgets so he needs a little help to understand them.
Widgets.
I’ve never really gotten them. I guess one could start out by trying to define widgets. But rather than going into that nonsense, the widgets I’ll be addressing are the little embed-able pieces of goo that seem to scour the web looking for a blog to infiltrate—the hows, the whys and the whats.
Good as they are, their function, design has always alluded me. When a client would ask me, “oh, can you do widgets,” I’d usually answer, “uh, not confident enough.” They come in Flash flavors, embedded HTML or Javascript. Hell, you could technically call the ad on Avalonstar’s post page a widget right? Stereotypes of said widgets would be the ones on say, iGoogle, Netvibes or Pageflakes.
As a project I’ve been working diligently on has progressed, I’ve had to come to terms with the widget. I can’t run away any longer but I’m going to come prepared. That’s where you come in. So with that said, I want to pose four questions:
- What do you feel is the general consensus among designers and site owners on Flash vs. HTML widgets? How do you feel about Flash vs. HTML widgets?
- Why are most widgets lacking in interactivity? Is it size limitations, lack of creativity, or something else?
- How big is too big when it comes to embedded widgets?
- If you are involved in HTML widget design, how do features like CSS customization play into the creation of those widgets?
Thanks for the help in advance. Said project and the widgets I’ll eventually start working with will be very appreciative. Feel free to state any examples of exceptional widgetry as well. :)
You’re getting too hung up on what “defines” a widget and not getting hung up on the technical aspects of a widget like you should be. Widgets, regardless of size, interactivity and coolness don’t stand on their legs without an API behind it to support it.
A widget without an internal/external API is a pretty useless widget. :) Example, a client wanted a little javascript widget on the homepage that cycled news titles. Where we getting the news title? Ah ha, we have to create a webservice / JSON thing to retrieve it. Ok, we care less about the javascript widget now and more about the technical implementation behind the two. If properly done with valid XHTML / CSS, the look/feel can be changed at any time.
Todd: I think that only matters if you expect end users to have the werewithal to use said API. Otherwise, the API is just an enabler for your own implementation. The ad, for example, has no API but still works. an API isn’t required.
However, the main idea of having an API does open up more possibilities such that if a user does want to use it, it’s already there.
In my opinion, the most important factor in creating a successful widget (in terms of people adopting it and spreading it throughout their sites) is customization. The ones that don’t offer this level of transparency are usually trying a bit too hard to brand their service on everyone’s site.
Take a look at the relatively simple Del.icio.us latest links widget, for example. Javascript which gives birth to nice standard code where everything has a class, making it extremely customizable. The user can essentially make it absolutely seamless with their site.
That’s what makes me love a widget.
Well, whatever kind you design, I recommend that you make sure it downgrades for people that block/can’t use that cool thing you design.
Start with a simple HTML widget that works (almost) by it’s self. Then use a simple JS script that (if enabled) will replace the HTML with your supper cool Flash object.
Personally, I use flash block for FF - so anything that is flashy/ad-like is auto-blocked. Plus, some cellphones might choke on your flash SWF. So no need only provide a flash version.
I was playing around with flickr badge a few days back and thought it was easy to personalize which I think is what users look for in a widget. :)
I’m not sure if lack of interactivity is due to the size but it would probably be because of the purpose of the widget that usually is limited to just listing stuff, as in flickr badge Or editing and listing as in todo list widgets. I wonder how much more interactive they can be…
customizability(its a word now) is a must if you want widespread adoption, because web designers are extremely finicky about not ruining their design, and having everything mesh, plus businesses want easy branding of the widget as well.
interactivity and size are probably relative to what the widget needs to accomplish. curious to see what your working on.