I definitely question the use of Flash in this example for navigation on the opening page. That was frustrating to figure out and the Flash based links were difficult to read and understand.
Then, after finally figuring that out, seeing the heart do its thing was somewhat interesting, but not hugely interesting, and I think some sound would have added a lot. The "tutorial" links didn't need to be mashed into the Flash, they could have been text based because they lead to tables of images, with empty alt attributes, and text. Those links could have supplied an alternative for those with visual challenges, except they were poorly designed and you'd have to be able to "see" the links in the Flash presentation in order to find them.
As long as I'm splitting hairs, I spent a few moments looking for "pop-up-menu to select the phase" as directed in the opening page. I think that refers to the "Tutorials" control?
For me, I "got" more info from the tutorials than by watching the heart go through its cycles.
Clicking on the "?" control resulted in a new window that was just ugly, Times Roman text, and full of <tr></tr><tr></tr><tr></tr><tr></tr><tr></tr>. Using empty table rows to create visual space is just wrong. Actually there was no need for a table on that page. A little application of CSS would have gone a long way. Oh, and images once again had empty alt attributes.
As far as usability I was left wondering "where do I go now"?
Christie Mason
Christie Mason
Posts made by Christie Mason
I've often found that using a tangible, shared example works better than discussing generic intangible concepts. Using the content and presentation of the Jump Menu offers a tangible example to discuss some intangible concepts.
The initial perception of usability/accessability is determined by navigation elements. How well does the navigation support the user's ability (usability) to find/access/understand the presentation? Often site designers and users have very different perceptions of the usefulness of navigational elements. Designers tend to make assumptions based on themselves as users w/o realizing that most users usually have different maps/assumptions than designers.
I suspect one of those perception differences is occurring now. The intent of the Jump menu may be to offer quick links to seminars but what is the value of being able to quick link to a previous or future seminars? Does that element earn it's space within a prime viewing area?
Yes, those forward/back buttons have no text and are non-intuitive, but it's how the list is presented and what it presents that are the real problems. First, there's no indication of what type of links it lists. My first assumption was that it would allow me to jump to different topics because that was the level of the page I was viewing. I'm a typical web user so "when in doubt, click on it". What the list presents is illegible. 5 characters of text that are mostly repetitions of "SCoPE..." The list appears to be generated by a database but there's some type of code trimming the # of characters it displays.
Repeating "SCoPE Seminar" within the seminar title is one of the contributing problems in the jump menu and it's also a breakcrumb/navigation problem.
SCoPE
SCoPE: Seminars
Forums
SCoPE Seminar: Accessibility of eLearning: December 4 - 17, 2006
Current Challenges
Descriptions of a higher level should not need to be repeated in lower levels. SCoPE doesn't need to be repeated in the next level description of "SCoPE: Seminars" and "SCoPE: Seminars" doesn't need to be repeated in the 4th level description.
SCoPE Seminars
Forums
Accessibility of eLearning
Current Challenges
My recommendation would be to either remove the Jump menu. Or, expand the # characters displayed in the list, simplify the descriptions and let the hierarchy supply the context. And/or, make the jump menu context sensitive so that it lists seminars on pages at the seminar level, forums at forum level pages, topic, replies etc.
Christie Mason
The initial perception of usability/accessability is determined by navigation elements. How well does the navigation support the user's ability (usability) to find/access/understand the presentation? Often site designers and users have very different perceptions of the usefulness of navigational elements. Designers tend to make assumptions based on themselves as users w/o realizing that most users usually have different maps/assumptions than designers.
I suspect one of those perception differences is occurring now. The intent of the Jump menu may be to offer quick links to seminars but what is the value of being able to quick link to a previous or future seminars? Does that element earn it's space within a prime viewing area?
Yes, those forward/back buttons have no text and are non-intuitive, but it's how the list is presented and what it presents that are the real problems. First, there's no indication of what type of links it lists. My first assumption was that it would allow me to jump to different topics because that was the level of the page I was viewing. I'm a typical web user so "when in doubt, click on it". What the list presents is illegible. 5 characters of text that are mostly repetitions of "SCoPE..." The list appears to be generated by a database but there's some type of code trimming the # of characters it displays.
Repeating "SCoPE Seminar" within the seminar title is one of the contributing problems in the jump menu and it's also a breakcrumb/navigation problem.
SCoPE
SCoPE: Seminars
Forums
SCoPE Seminar: Accessibility of eLearning: December 4 - 17, 2006
Current Challenges
Descriptions of a higher level should not need to be repeated in lower levels. SCoPE doesn't need to be repeated in the next level description of "SCoPE: Seminars" and "SCoPE: Seminars" doesn't need to be repeated in the 4th level description.
SCoPE
Seminars
Forums
Accessibility of eLearning
Current Challenges
My recommendation would be to either remove the Jump menu. Or, expand the # characters displayed in the list, simplify the descriptions and let the hierarchy supply the context. And/or, make the jump menu context sensitive so that it lists seminars on pages at the seminar level, forums at forum level pages, topic, replies etc.
Christie Mason
Money usually speaks with a loud voice so I'd present that an accessible web presentation requires less investment to develop and maintain. It's the same point that's often made for the benefits of being compliant to web standards. Something that you'll often see is that one of the benefits of being web standards compliant is increased accessibility.
For any presentation, simplier is better. I recommend always starting with the simpliest and then adding complexity only where it's needed because each layer of complexity requires more elements, increased costs, to keep it accessible. Text > Images > PDFs > Audio > Flash/Video. The simpler your presentation, the less it costs to develop and maintain, while making it easier to increase your user's ability to access the content.
Christie Mason
For any presentation, simplier is better. I recommend always starting with the simpliest and then adding complexity only where it's needed because each layer of complexity requires more elements, increased costs, to keep it accessible. Text > Images > PDFs > Audio > Flash/Video. The simpler your presentation, the less it costs to develop and maintain, while making it easier to increase your user's ability to access the content.
Christie Mason
Money usually speaks with a loud voice so I'd present that an accessible web presentation requires less investment to develop and maintain. It's the same point that's often made for the benefits of being compliant to web standards. Something that you'll often see is that one of the benefits of being web standards compliant is increased accessibility.
For any presentation, simplier is better. I recommend always starting with the simpliest and then adding complexity only where it's needed because each layer of complexity requires more elements, increased costs, to keep it accessible. Text > Images > PDFs > Audio > Flash/Video. The simpler your presentation, the less it costs to develop and maintain, while making it easier to increase your user's ability to access the content.
Christie Mason
For any presentation, simplier is better. I recommend always starting with the simpliest and then adding complexity only where it's needed because each layer of complexity requires more elements, increased costs, to keep it accessible. Text > Images > PDFs > Audio > Flash/Video. The simpler your presentation, the less it costs to develop and maintain, while making it easier to increase your user's ability to access the content.
Christie Mason
I've often found that using a tangible, shared example works better than discussing generic intangible concepts. Using the content and presentation of the Jump Menu offers a tangible example to discuss some intangible concepts.
The initial perception of usability/accessability is determined by navigation elements. How well does the navigation support the user's ability (usability) to find/access/understand the presentation? Often site designers and users have very different perceptions of the usefulness of navigational elements. Designers tend to make assumptions based on themselves as users w/o realizing that most users usually have different maps/assumptions than designers.
I suspect one of those perception differences is occurring now. The intent of the Jump menu may be to offer quick links to seminars but what is the value of being able to quick link to a previous or future seminars? Does that element earn it's space within a prime viewing area?
Yes, those forward/back buttons have no text and are non-intuitive, but it's how the list is presented and what it presents that are the real problems. First, there's no indication of what type of links it lists. My first assumption was that it would allow me to jump to different topics because that was the level of the page I was viewing. I'm a typical web user so "when in doubt, click on it". What the list presents is illegible. 5 characters of text that are mostly repetitions of "SCoPE..." The list appears to be generated by a database but there's some type of code trimming the # of characters it displays.
Repeating "SCoPE Seminar" within the seminar title is one of the contributing problems in the jump menu and it's also a breakcrumb/navigation problem.
SCoPE SCoPE: Seminars
Forums
SCoPE Seminar: Accessibility of eLearning: December 4 - 17, 2006
Current Challenges
Descriptions of a higher level should not need to be repeated in lower levels. SCoPE doesn't need to be repeated in the next level description of "SCoPE: Seminars" and "SCoPE: Seminars" doesn't need to be repeated in the 4th level description.
SCoPE Seminars
Forums
Accessibility of eLearning
Current Challenges
My recommendation would be to either remove the Jump menu. Or, expand the # characters displayed in the list, simplify the descriptions and let the hierarchy supply the context. And/or, make the jump menu context sensitive so that it lists seminars on pages at the seminar level, forums at forum level pages, topic, replies etc.
Christie Mason
The initial perception of usability/accessability is determined by navigation elements. How well does the navigation support the user's ability (usability) to find/access/understand the presentation? Often site designers and users have very different perceptions of the usefulness of navigational elements. Designers tend to make assumptions based on themselves as users w/o realizing that most users usually have different maps/assumptions than designers.
I suspect one of those perception differences is occurring now. The intent of the Jump menu may be to offer quick links to seminars but what is the value of being able to quick link to a previous or future seminars? Does that element earn it's space within a prime viewing area?
Yes, those forward/back buttons have no text and are non-intuitive, but it's how the list is presented and what it presents that are the real problems. First, there's no indication of what type of links it lists. My first assumption was that it would allow me to jump to different topics because that was the level of the page I was viewing. I'm a typical web user so "when in doubt, click on it". What the list presents is illegible. 5 characters of text that are mostly repetitions of "SCoPE..." The list appears to be generated by a database but there's some type of code trimming the # of characters it displays.
Repeating "SCoPE Seminar" within the seminar title is one of the contributing problems in the jump menu and it's also a breakcrumb/navigation problem.
SCoPE
SCoPE: Seminars
Forums
SCoPE Seminar: Accessibility of eLearning: December 4 - 17, 2006
Current Challenges
Descriptions of a higher level should not need to be repeated in lower levels. SCoPE doesn't need to be repeated in the next level description of "SCoPE: Seminars" and "SCoPE: Seminars" doesn't need to be repeated in the 4th level description.
SCoPE
Seminars
Forums
Accessibility of eLearning
Current Challenges
My recommendation would be to either remove the Jump menu. Or, expand the # characters displayed in the list, simplify the descriptions and let the hierarchy supply the context. And/or, make the jump menu context sensitive so that it lists seminars on pages at the seminar level, forums at forum level pages, topic, replies etc.
Christie Mason