Re: Link mania; more on frames and the number of navigation links on a UI

[Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- jci -dot- com]

I went to that MS study as well, and, apart from the bad writing and worse
layout that was mentioned already, found myself wondering just what it was
they had measured. I know what they thought they measured, but I'm not at
all sure that what they measured was what they wanted to measure, or what
they claimed to measure.

The results went all over the map. They said 32x16 performed slightly
better in one section, then reversed themselves and said 16x32 performed
better in another. Then showed a chart which claimed users preferred the
8x8x8 layout, even though both the others apparently performed better.
Their theory was that in 8x8x8 the category labels were too broad. If true,
all this proves is that bad information architecture keeps a user from
finding information. Duh! The test would have been more valid if they had
used an 8x8x8 test in which they didn't *have* to create bad labels from
the beginning. Bad design means bad results. Had they used vaguer
categories on the other two tests, they would have had worse results there,
too.

The study is flawed, perhaps to the point of uselessness. Here's an option
they didn't test: all the topics on one page, arranged in a well-defined
index heirarchy, using indentation or some other indicator to show category
breaks. One single page to list all the links, well done, would have
trumped every one of their proposed designs. To me, very few things on the
web are as irritating as finding out I have to click down one more level
than I think is necessary to get to the link I want.

Web surfing is like golf, fewest clicks wins.

This and similar studies fail precisely because they don't account for the
variability of information. (You *do* know the difference between data and
information, don't you?) There are organic classifications to information.
The trick in arranging information then is to make sure you follow as
closely as possible the same classifications as your audience does, whether
that is 2 or 102. There's no magic number of links. To paraphrase Einstein,
use as many as necessary, and no more. Let your information and your
audience tell you what that number is, don't pull some arbitrary number out
of some study which concentrated on information unrelated to your own.

Every web page has to answer three questions:
1) Where am I?
2) Where can I go from here?
3) What's on this page?

How meticulously the answers must fit the questions depends upon the nature
of the website. Obviously, for example, you don't need to list every
possible page on the web that a user can go to from this particular page.
But there should be a list of pages, based upon the fact that the user is
on this particular page in this particular website, that the user might
find useful or necessary to visit. If the number is 2, list them. If it's
100, list them.

100 links, well-ordered and well-organized, are not as daunting as 25 links
in a semi-random order. People are quite used to scanning large chunks of
information on a computer screen in order to sort out the relevant
piece(s); they do it all the time. Supply a well-organized pattern of
information to the finest pattern-matching engine the world has ever seen
(the brain) and then get out of the way and let it do what it does best.

Spend more time organizing your links well, and you won't need to spend any
time wondering how many of them there should be.

Have fun,
Arlen
Chief Managing Director In Charge, Department of Redundancy Department
DNRC 224

Arlen -dot- P -dot- Walker -at- JCI -dot- Com
----------------------------------------------
In God we trust; all others must provide data.
----------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed are mine and mine alone.
If JCI had an opinion on this, they'd hire someone else to deliver it.



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Develop HTML-Based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver 4 ($100 STC Discount)
**WEST COAST LOCATIONS** San Jose (Mar 1-2), San Francisco (Apr 16-17)
http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.

Sponsored by DigiPub Solutions Corp, producers of PDF 2001 
Conference East, June 4-5, Baltimore/Washington D.C. area.
http://www.pdfconference.com or toll-free 877/278-2131. 

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.