About 16 days ago I prophesized the death of web design in my oh-so verbose post. In hindsight, I do think many elements of web design are going to die, but I also think in death will be a transformation.

In many regards, web design has not changed significantly since its founding days in the ’90s. Most sites are created as static presences with text that users can consume and perhaps a contact form that can be used to transmit a simple message. This method of communication has become so branded on the internet that it seems almost routine to set it up for any organization.

That’s not a bad thing. Organizations should communicate with people online. The internet offers the ability to communicate with the most people at the cheapest rates.

However, I think web design is due for some death and transformation. No longer can organizations just idly post content. They must engage. They must reach out to their market and actively communicate with people. They must build a brand online that can be accessed, discussed and followed with ease.

Right now, much of the web is passive. There is little interaction and few ways to connect with most organizations.

Web design as a concept won’t die anytime soon, but the methods that have engulfed it will — they must — and a new breed of communication will emerge. I look forward to it.

Ah, web design, good buddy..you’re about to die. That’s right. Web design is on its deathbed. There are no cures or operations that can save it. Web design is dying.

If you’re a web designer and reading this then you’ve probably put down your coffee and asked yourself what the hell I’m talking about. I’m a designer, too, so let me shed some light on the grim death of web design.

Web design started pretty much around 1995 or whenever companies decided it was a good idea to get online. It was the birth of a new level of communication. It was pretty freaking exciting, too (though, at the time, I was 11 and had more pressing concerns such as the release of Independence Day).

As companies scrambled to get online, web design became a new, uncharted avenue for making money. To know HTML, DHTML and JavaScript in those days was like having a PhD, but you didn’t have to pay gazillions of dollars to acquire those skills! So some smart fool started selling these skills.

When you have one guy raking in boatloads of money for something that’s actually pretty easy to do, it catches on. The next guy opens shop and says, “I can do what that guy’s doing and I can do it better.” Now you have new people with new skills and ideas permeating the new found web design industry. It’s pretty cool, especially during the dot com bubble. Imagine gobs of money. Don’t I wish I had started web design back then? That’s a different story.

I experienced two separate incidents this week in which I had a client complain about pretty significant things with my designs. Normally, during the mock-up stage, I’m all ears for critical feedback but these complaints surfaced after the sites had been designed and built. I guess that was just the frosting on the cake.

The more important thing is deciding who the designer is on the project. I’m serious. Is it the designer or the client? The client brought the designer on supposedly because they need a web site created. That’s the purpose of the designer and the job they have been paid to do. I can appreciate client input during the design process — in fact I wholeheartedly welcome it — but there comes a point when I just want to say, “Why did you hire me? You’re obviously a very capable designer.”

But then it strikes. Why are they doing my job?

There are a number of reasons I’ve discovered. Sometimes it’s because they’re a control freak and can’t let any detail escape their approval. Other times they just don’t know better. Actually, I guess those are really the only cases I run into.

There are different solutions I apply to these two situations. For the control freak, I have to stroke their ego. It sucks and I hate it, but if it gets the job done, then I’ll do it. These people are typically overbearing and at times annoying. The best way to deal with them is by reaffirming their status and — unfortunately — by running every little thing by them. I try to keep them in the loop every step of the way so that they feel involved and important. Usually, if I do it this way, I don’t get the major complaints at the end of the project. And if I do, I just explain the decision processes that we both went through.

The other type of client who doesn’t know any better just needs a little hand holding. Typically, strong communication and clear explanations of “how it is” will get them to calm down.

Finally, I find it important to just hold my own at times. If someone’s complaining about a design decision I made, I’ll look at them pointedly and say, “Look. This is my job. I designed it this way because I want to maximize the potential of the site. Here is the methodology behind my approach.. yadda yadda..” Well, I wouldn’t say it as bluntly as that, but you catch my drift.

This isn’t about feeling insecure because a client doesn’t like my work. This is about defending my profession and not letting someone who frankly doesn’t know anything about creating web sites take control of the project and destroy it. This is the cold reality of it.

Besides, would you ever tell your doctor how to do their job?

I just spent nearly an hour trying to get some little piece of code to work. The strange thing is that the code wasn’t that essential and could definitely wait. Nevertheless, I kept chugging along trying to get the damn thing to work. Needless to say, I didn’t get it to work and before I knew it I had lost a good chunk of important time.

I’m the type of person to get sucked into the nitty gritty details of everything. Whether it’s trying to get the right color or tighten a screw just the right amount, I’m all over it. It might be cool that it comes out perfectly except for the fact that it’s a total waste of time. No one cares that there’s a tiny detail out of place. Nobody even notices. Why should I?

The problem with people like me is that we get in our own way. We know that the finer details can wait but our mind isn’t right until it’s correctly implemented. I don’t know, maybe it’s a bit OCD or something.

I just need to keep reminding myself to forget the details. Is that something you can practice?

Ok, I’ll admit, I’m pretty new to JavaScript and jQuery, so as a disclaimer, my coding may not be perfect or concise. With that said, I’m going to explain how to build dynamic navigation highlighting using a little JavaScript and jQuery. The first step is to explain the problem.

Most web sites that follow good usability practices will tell visitors where they are on the site. It’s kind of like that directory map in a shopping mall with the big red “YOU ARE HERE” arrow. On web sites, this is usually accomplished by highlighting or shading the navigation object that the user is currently on.

Getting bogged down in bad client meetings can always put a strain on motivation. And nothing is worse for a web designer than lack of motivation. The best way to beat the dreaded bad client meeting is to actively prepare to make it the highlight of your day.

What’s the point?

The first thing you’re going to want to nail down is the purpose of the meeting. Don’t meet for the sake of meeting or for a “status update.” Clarify with the client the point of the meeting and what needs to be accomplished.

Would you drive to the grocery store for no reason? I hope not. You’d go to re-stock your pantry or fridge. That’s a purpose.

I’ve always been fascinated by homes on wheels. So much jammed into a little tin box with the mobility to go almost anywhere there is a road (or not, as we will see).

Specifically, motor coaches are amazing pieces of architecture. These are the supreme kings of the road. Complete with bathrooms, queen-sized beds, TVs, and heck — even car ports. These monsters are an inspiration for their creative designs and ability to compact so much into such limited space.

I decided to roll out a new design for my web site. I told myself not to do it — to instead focus on actually creating new content. Nevertheless, I caved and spent the past holiday weekend re-building.

I actually find creating something new therapeutic and inspiring. The process and tasks involved serve as an excellent motivator. So, with that said, I’ll leave you to this new design.

I’ve been watching @copyblogger tweeting about how unnecessary personal branding is. To build a good brand for yourself, all you need to do is be exceptional.

I would definitely agree that to maintain your brand you must do good work. That’s obvious. However, I would argue that there is more to it than that.

Branding is the art of setting up a platform for yourself. It consists of everything from how you communicate to the tools you use to communicate with. These are all necessities. You can’t do good work without them.

Sure, you might not need to worry too much about branding if you’re established and have the capacity to make your good work known, but if you’re just getting started, you can’t rely on the “build it and they will come” philosophy. You have to get out there and establish an image for yourself. And whether or not you want to call this personal branding is up to you.

Once you get to the point where you’re known is when you can let others build your brand for you.

The web has really allowed people to individualize themselves. With the onslaught of social networking tools, we can create pretty strong identities. The big problem, of course, is brand control.

When someone types your name into Google, what do they find? Unfortunately, if your name is John Smith or Jane Doe, you’re pretty much out of luck. But if your name is a little less common, do you appear in the search results? Do you dominate the results?

If not, you could run into a branding problem. Branding is something you want to control. When someone searches for you, you need to come up first — and you need to come up in a result that you control.