[Sigia-l] Web Developers

[Jared M. Spool]

At 09:06 PM 2/2/2006, Listera wrote:
>Elizabeth Gershenzon:
>
> > I thought I would share this
> > great resource online called "The Web Developer's Handbook" it has
> > compiled an extensive list of useful relevant websites for developers.
> >
> > http://www.alvit.de/handbook/
>
>Useful. I reckon Jared's thrilled with the new design. :-)

Well, as a matter of fact, I have mixed opinions about the design. Don't 
know if you're *actually* interested in them, but since you brought me into 
this conversation, I'll tell you.

In general, I think the overall layout of the links is fine. The quantity 
of links on the page isn't where this site has problems. The spacing seems 
to work well. If I were to observe users working with the page, I think it 
would stand up to the test quite fine.

Where I think users will have problems is in the actually categorization 
and naming of the links. Some of the categories work to distinguish their 
content from the others, such as "Fonts", "Usability & Accessibility", and 
"SEO references". Others (at least to me) seem a little less distinguished: 
I wonder if people will know where their target content will be located. 
"Miscellaneous Tools", for example is one of the largest categories. To me, 
it's always a red flag when something is labelled "Miscellaneous" -- 
especially when it's a large group. ("Miscellaneous" is synonymous with 
"Random Crap". If you're happy with the label "Random Crap", then 
"Miscellaneous" may just work for you.)

Categories can be a problem in most schemes, so one way to solve it is to 
have descriptive content under each category to explain it. Links, when 
descriptive, can be very useful. However, I fear that the links on this 
page really aren't very descriptive. They are, for the most part, page 
titles or blog names. For example, under "Usability & Accessibility", (a 
category I pride myself in knowing a little about,) most of the links are 
the names of sites, such as "Access Matters" and "Siteusability.com".

This is fine if you are looking to find the site. But the only scenario I 
can think of for that is that you already know the site name (and therefore 
can find it via it's URL or Google), I'm not sure that adds value. Instead, 
the user is forced to pogostick < http://tinyurl.com/ds6rt > to identify if 
the content contains what their seeking.

So, I think that if I watched users with the site (the only way I can 
determine whether it works or not), I'm betting I'd see pogosticking 
because of the links and categories.

That's my opinion. It's worth what you paid for it.

Jared


Jared M. Spool, Founding Principal, User Interface Engineering
4 Lookout Lane, Unit 4d, Middleton, MA 01949
978 777-9123   jspool at uie.com  http://www.uie.com
Blog: http://www.uie.com/brainsparks