CHI-WEB Archives

ACM SIGCHI WWW Human Factors (Open Discussion)

CHI-WEB@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Toby Hede <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Toby Hede <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 26 Aug 1999 01:58:58 GMT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (126 lines)
i think that it remains to be seen that all information can be represented
in a tree/hierarchy. The tree system is a representation that stems from the
last 20/30 years of file system hierarchies...nielsen, among others has
pointed out that many new computer users have a great deal of trouble with
the tree or hierarchical methodology. the tree is limiting as an information
methodology, it disallows the entire network principle that makes the web
such a valuable medium. a tree system permits only one classification for
information...each 'unit/block' of information resides within one branch of
the tree, but different users will have different classifications for the
same information. using a strict tree structure your are in reality
enforcing your classification upon them.

Searching:
i agree that having to page back through the search results in order to
perform another search can be frustrating, but a page with 10,000 search
results on it would be rather slow to load and difficult to navigate through
coherently. a better way to resolve this issue is to have a 'refine search'
input area at the top (and perhaps bottom) of the page. some of the better
search engines do indeed use this technique.

Back Buttons:
there are two issues here. the browser's back button takes you back through
the history of navigation actions. but, a great deal of information forms
part of a logical stream in itself. especially with deep links forming an
integral part of the web (see below), the need to link within a stream of
information is vitally important. imagine an encyclopedia or dictionary that
refused to let you turn to the previous or next pages, but would only let
you return to the index or table of contents (or wherever it was you last
were)...i think the art is in differentiating between the two types of back
and forward activity.

Site Entry:
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990725.html
if a user needs to hit your site from the top in order to map your
information, than the navigation system is probably not transparent enough.
menu structures and page titles can provide instant user recognition of
location within a larger information structure, plus provide the flexibility
that a networked information structure demands.



>From: John Nissen <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Tree model integrity
>Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 21:02:57 GMT
>
>Hello,
>
>A few weeks ago we had a thread about the importance of building
>up a coherent mental model, so you know where you are when you
>are navigating a site (but, if you get lost, you can quickly find
>yourself again).
>
>Now, during your navigation of the web, the browser builds up a
>tree of visitations.  You are aware of this when you use the back
>and forward buttons, and also when the colour of links change.
>
>I believe many problems that users have with web applications are
>due to the applications messing up the browser's tree.  Sites should
>have all information in a hierarchy, so that the model of the site
>maps onto the browser model.  And sites should avoid "short cut" buttons,
>instead leaving the user to use the browser to do the navigation.
>
>I claim:
>
>A.  It is possible to present almost all information in a tree hierarchy,
>where the nodes are pages and the branches are hypertext links.
>(Help information, glossary of terms and dictionaries are exceptions,
>since cross-linking is inevitable.)
>
>B.  Most navigation buttons introduced to make it faster or simpler
>for the user actually have the opposite effect, because they
>subvert the browser's own controls.
>
>Some implications:
>
>1.  Searching
>
>The search engine should present results on a single page.
>It should not break the results into a number of pages and have
>"next" and "previous" buttons.  Instead the user should be allowed
>to scroll.  The browser back button will then take the user straight
>back to where they started with the search form, no messing.
>Search refinement should be from this same point.
>
>2.  Back buttons
>
>The application should never supply its own back, forward
>or home buttons.
>
>3.  Internal links
>
>There should be no links between different points of the same
>page.  All links should point down the hierarchy.  (Exceptions
>are for cross-referencing in help files and dictionaries.)
>Applications should never have "top of the page" buttons.
>
>4.  Site entry
>
>Users should be encouraged to visit the site starting at the
>top.    Then the tree of the site will map directly onto the
>browser tree as it creates it.
>
>5.  Table of contents or index
>
>This should be on a separate page at a level above the contents
>itself.
>
>6.  References
>
>These should generally be in a page by themselves at the lowest
>level.
>
>Cheers from Chiswick,
>
>John
>--
>Access the word, access the world       Tel/fax +44 181 742 3170/8715
>John Nissen                             Email to [log in to unmask]
>Cloudworld Ltd., Chiswick, London, UK   http://www.tommy.demon.co.uk


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2