it's unfortunate that we have to fight off a trends because bad design becomes standard.
the user experience can become enriched whatever medium it is delivered in. I think what sets us back in when people compare "cf" to "flash" or "dhtml" to "flash" All these tools can play friendly together. I would be upset if everyone just "settled" on 1 particular navigation. I guess I am just surprised with the either or methodology here. Lofback, Chris wrote: >>Blue, underlined text is hardly navigation. That's just a common >>identifier for a link, which in HTML is an action, not necessarily >>navigation. A link can do a number of things like execute a javascript >>function or dhtml. >> >>Google, since you mention how standard it is, does not use >>this for it's >>core navigation. Web, Images, Groups, Directory, and News (The four >>categories of google) are represented with blue text in a box. If >>selected the box is blue, if not it's gray. This is hardly a standard, >>but none the less is effective because users are familiar with tabular >>menus. > > > <CF_UsabilitySoapBox> > > Well, this is quibbling over minor differences and word definitions. And I know I'm > blowing against the wind here, but the simple fact is that users know what to do > with blue, underlined text and HTML buttons. Why deviate from something that users > know? It only makes it harder for them and increases the likelihood that they won't > use your site--unless they have no place else to go. Here is the key phrase in your > post: > > >>effective because users are familiar > > > That is the heart of the matter. > > >>Every site, whether flash or html, navigate completely different. > > > This is pretty much true and it's a negative, not a positive. On the web, different > != good usability. All of those sites with different/unique navigation are harder > to use than "standard" blue underlines and HTML widgets because users have to figure > them out--and they HATE that. Even if you think, what's the big deal, it only takes > a few minutes? They HATE to be forced to learn something new when all they want to > do is...whatever...anything but be forced by some web site to endure their > "different" navigation. > > Look at Yahoo, eBay, Amazon and Google. I'd guess they are among the most heavily > used sites and they rely on "standard" light/white background, dark/black text, blue > underlined links and (for the most part) standard form elements. Minor > differences, but they don't stray far from the basics. They know what works. And > we can leverage the usability of those sites by mimicking their navigation and > design elements. Most users will know how to navigate a site that looks like them. > I know this is anathema to all of the web artistes out there, but it's the truth: > the big sites really define usability for the rest of us. We ignore it at our peril. > > There is room for individuality, but most of the Flash example that were suggested > on the list are shooting themselves in the foot, IMHO. If we, as developers, care > whether or not our site is usable by the most people (which means more opportunities > for sales/readers/customers/etc) then we must bow to the simple needs of users and > not force our techie-oriented "user experiences" on them. And using Flash like most > sites do goes against good usability. > > </CF_UsabilitySoapBox> > > Man, I need a weekend off! :) > > Chris > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
