[Sigia-l] Site maps for web apps, vs for content sites?

[Stewart Dean]

Hi Anne,

Turning the site map on it's side doesnt really alter much I feel, especialy 
if, like me, you don't use screen shaped  boxes all running horizontal on 
the same level (sort of default IA that works for simple sites).

I have my own system that is not as tidy as some but does allow more 
information to be communicated. My screen shaped boxes are now long and thin 
and my structure tends to use both horizontal and vertical organisation.  
You can't do medium to large websites if you apply 'vertical row to level of 
site' as you run out of space, unless you break it down into many smaller 
websites - which I feel looks tidy but you loose the information you can 
gain by looking at large chunks of the site at a glance.

It's easy to integrate flows into my site maps using arrows to determine 
flow (site maps by default should not use arrows, just lines).

It is a case of clarity vs. information at times - breaking applications out 
allows more detail to be added and for them to be viewed in isolation, but 
this can be done on the same site map with no real harm.

Personaly I feel that drawing site maps then printing them out feels like a 
very convaluted way of working. Currently no tool merges site map generation 
as we know it effectively into the site creation process. I dream of an 
information architecture tool that actualy works the way an IA works rather 
then just a natty diagraming tool.

Stewart Dean

>From: "Anne Hjortshoj" <anne at mindstorm.com>
>Reply-To: anne at mindstorm.com
>To: "Eric Scheid" <eric.scheid at ironclad.net.au>
>CC: sigia l <sigia-l at asis.org>
>Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Site maps for web apps, vs for content sites?
>Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 10:44:25 -0500 (EST)
>
>
>The easiest way to apply a site map to an interaction flow is to turn the
>site map on its side and show all page hierarchies -and- workflows from
>left to right.  This way, you don't have to worry about the distinction
>between hierarchical page relationships vs. workflow page relationships,
>and you don't have the design challenge of throwing a workflow into
>something that looks like an org chart.
>
>Relurking,
>
>-AH
>
> > another look at a particular deliberable:
> >
> >> Site maps generally fall into two different categories:- those that
> >> document
> >> the navigational structure of the site, and those that describe
> >> interaction
> >> flow. As the days of enormous, static sites vignette to make way for
> >> sites
> >> driven by logic not links, we naturally see a shift in emphasis from
> >> navigational maps to those which document interaction. The question
> >> worth
> >> exploring, however, is can this form of documentation continue to prove
> >> both
> >> useful and a valuable investment of resources?
> >
> > http://allinthehead.com/retro/279/site-maps-for-web-applications
> >
> > I'm liking the approach he's come up with.
> >
> >
> >
> > e.
> >
> > ------------
> > When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
> > *Plain text, please; NO Attachments
> >
> > Searchable Archive at http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
> >
> > IA 06 Summit.  Mark your calendar.  March 23-27, Vancouver, BC.
> > http://www.iasummit.org/
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
> > Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l
> >
>
>
>------------
>When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
>*Plain text, please; NO Attachments
>
>Searchable Archive at http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
>
>IA 06 Summit.  Mark your calendar.  March 23-27, Vancouver, BC.  
>http://www.iasummit.org/
>
>
>________________________________________
>Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
>Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l