Major Tom, Is Your Dashboard Usable?
Group controls that have similar functions together
In a spaceship, the buttons and panels that monitor and control related functions are grouped together. The steering control that allows you to thrust forward should be close to the steering control that allows you to thrust backward (so it's easy to back up if you get too close to the sun). The panel that displays weather conditions outside should not be between the two.
For the right-side navigation bar, most of the links direct users to areas of content on the site, not to the site's auxiliary navigation tools. For the bottom navigation bar, most of the links direct users to areas of site navigation, not areas of site content. However, there is some overlap.. The right-side navigation bar includes links to navigational pages on the site, namely "Search" and "Site Maps." The bottom navigation bar includes links to areas of the content on the site, namely the "Index" and "Library." For the user who is thinking that the function of right-side navigation bar is to provide access to the major content areas of the site and the function of the bottom navigation bar is to provide access to navigation pages, this overlap is confusing.
Many of the navigation tables as they now exist are largely in alphabetical order. Alphabetical organization schemes work well in a phone book, when a user knows what they're looking for. But in situations where users are browsing instead of performing known-item searching, other organization schemes such as grouping by topic or task are more appropriate.
Recommendations:
- Segment elements in categories, rather than organizing all lists alphabetically. Group like elements together. Most sites generally break down into two types of entities, the content itself, and information about the content. Such information about the content (called meta-information) should be grouped together, and remain distinct from the content-related categories. So in Stars.com, meta-information elements such as "Home," "Search," "About the WDVL," and "Feedback" should be grouped together. The actual content of the site: the descriptions of remote resources and the local content should also be grouped together.
- Group content areas by users' needs. Currently the site is grouped largely by subject (e.g., "Authoring", "Internet"). It may make more sense to group content according to the way users use the information. For example, all the articles could go under a single heading, as could all of the "Bookmarks" and "Pictures", since users tend to utilize different types of content in different contexts.
Choose precise labels that make sense to your audience
Throughout the site, there is an overlap of terms. For example does the term "Library" refer to the "Web Developer's Virtual Library" or to the "Virtual Library of WWW Development"? Another example is "Index;" we assumed that it was an index to the content on the site, but it's actually "The Webmaster's Encyclopedia."
Recommendations:
- Choose precise labels so their meanings are not ambiguous, and do so with the least number of words possible. In the case of "Index" a better choice would have been "Encyclopedia" or "The Webmaster's Encyclopedia."
- Be aware that the way you label content may have different meanings to different audiences. For example, we're librarians. In the real world, we're used to finding the reference area in the library. But we were confused in Stars.com to find the "Library" in "Reference."
Provide contextual information for labels and for the site as a whole
Most areas of this site provide contextual information. For example, the overview provides a good description of what users are likely to find in each category of the site. However, some pages lack this contextual information. This is especially noticeable on the main page which provides no description of what users can expect to find on the site as a whole. Also, clicking on some links (for example, "Top100") displays a page that does not describe what the page contains. This occurs rarely on the site, but is confusing when it does.
The feedback form is one of the best we've ever seen, because it provides the Webmaster with context to help resolve problems; it notes what page the user was on, and the platform and browser being used. It is somewhat ironic that the feedback form provides context for the Webmasters, but the Webmasters sometimes do not provide context for the users.
Recommendations:
- Make the main page more like the overview. Provide context for the sea of labels, by including less labels, but more descriptive information about what each of the groupings contains.
- Let each page frame user expectations about what they will find on the page. Provide at least a phrase or a sentence that describes what is available on the page.
|
