http://tc.eserver.org/publisher/Frontend_Infocentre A listing of works published by Frontend Infocentre in the field of technical communication. en-us Copyright (c) 2005-08 by the EServer. All rights reserved. tclib-editorial@eserver.org (TC Library Editorial Board) webmaster@eserver.org (Geoffrey Sauer) http://tc.eserver.org/images/newlogo.gif http://tc.eserver.org/dir/Frontend_Infocentre http://tc.eserver.org/34501.html http://tc.eserver.org/34501.html The out-of-box experience (OOBE) describes the user's first interaction with a product or service. In the technology sector this first experience invariably involves plugging stuff in, installing some software and crossing your fingers in the hope that the product will work. The problem is that, in far too many cases, it doesn’t. http://tc.eserver.org/34456.html http://tc.eserver.org/34456.html The use of personas as a method for communicating user requirements in collaborative design environments is well established. However, very little research has been conducted to quantify the benefits of using this technique. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of using personas. An experiment was conducted over a period of 5 weeks using students from NCAD. The results showed that, through using personas, designs with superior usability characteristics were produced. They also indicate that using personas provides a significant advantage during the research and conceptualisation stages of the design process (supporting previously unfounded claims). The study also investigated the effects of using different presentation methods to present personas and concluded that photographs worked better than illustrations, and that visual storyboards were more effective in presenting task scenarios than text only versions. http://tc.eserver.org/34457.html http://tc.eserver.org/34457.html Usability is central to the successful completion of online forms. Whether applying for insurance, completing tax returns or simply making an online purchase, a poorly designed or confusing form can lead to users abandoning the process. The following are some tips when designing online forms. http://tc.eserver.org/34458.html http://tc.eserver.org/34458.html User centred design can be a useful and speedy way of increasing efficiency and hence reducing costs. More often that not, design is seen as a way of increasing sales, attracting eyeballs or retaining customers. However at Frontend we've noticed that some of our most successful projects concentrate on cost-reduction and business efficiency. Here's a few ways we've used user centred design to help our clients save money. http://tc.eserver.org/34459.html http://tc.eserver.org/34459.html The out of box experience (OOBE) describes the users first interaction with a product or service. In the technology sector this first experience invariably involves plugging stuff in, installing some software and crossing your fingers in the hope that the product will work. The problem is that, in far too many cases, it doesn’t. http://tc.eserver.org/34460.html http://tc.eserver.org/34460.html The benefits of user testing have long been established. It is still important however to try and maximise these benefits. One way in which this can be done is by viewing the user test yourself. http://tc.eserver.org/34461.html http://tc.eserver.org/34461.html It is important to remember that the experience a person has using a product or service is every bit as important as that product or services usability. http://tc.eserver.org/34462.html http://tc.eserver.org/34462.html Focus groups are a great way to collect information from several people very quickly and cost effectively. They are mainly used to gauge people’s reactions and feelings to items, however when used appropriately they can also be used as part of user requirements gathering. http://tc.eserver.org/34463.html http://tc.eserver.org/34463.html In recent user testing with a range of participants including Visually Impaired (VIP) and Blind users we found that the majority of problems were common across all groups. However the effect of poor usability is more severe for users with visual disabilities. Surprisingly all of the issues are very familiar and are easy to fix so we thought we’d revisit some of the basics of accessible web design. http://tc.eserver.org/34464.html http://tc.eserver.org/34464.html In several recent websites we have user tested, the site designers have placed important task critical links and information on the right hand side (RHS) of three column page layouts. The user testing was conclusive, users ignore any information presented on the RHS. We think this is a similar effect to the well documented banner blindness. It is essential to ensure that import links or information is not positioned on the RHS as they will surely be ignored. http://tc.eserver.org/34465.html http://tc.eserver.org/34465.html The key principal of UCD is integrating users that represent the profiles of the target user group/s into the development process. Typically, friends, family and (most definitely) colleagues are not representative of the target user base! However, they’re nearly always free with advice. But the validity of this advice is often questionable. In order to integrate unbiased user feedback into the process the following are key steps in a UCD process. http://tc.eserver.org/34466.html http://tc.eserver.org/34466.html Could a charter of rights for the user of web applications lead to the design of user-centred interfaces, better user experience and avoid causing frustration, irritation and consequently lost business? The following is an attempt to outline a charter of rights for the user of web applications. http://tc.eserver.org/34467.html http://tc.eserver.org/34467.html Requirements gathering is all about aiming at the right target. It doesn't matter how accurate you are, if you aim at the wrong target, you miss. http://tc.eserver.org/34473.html http://tc.eserver.org/34473.html It is perfectly possible to diligently apply alt text to every image on a site and create a result that is completely useless. Unless the alt text effectively conveys the information the image displays, it will be ineffective. http://tc.eserver.org/27476.html http://tc.eserver.org/27476.html Research indicates that most users never find the majority of the functionality in any given application. Learning tends to reach a plateau early on, and is rarely expanded upon. And what that means is that most customers consistently undervalue the software products they purchase and use. http://tc.eserver.org/27477.html http://tc.eserver.org/27477.html Users with special needs who are not sufficiently visually impaired to require assistive technologies can still be frustrated by poor contrast, problematic colour schemes, or tiny, unreadable text. Up to 10% of men are colour blind to some extent, and the increasing number of older users are less likely to have 20/20 vision than those designing the pages. http://tc.eserver.org/27412.html http://tc.eserver.org/27412.html User Centred Design (UCD) is an approach to design where the end user is placed at the heart of the design and development process. It could even be described as a ‘Design Philosophy’. Knowing who your users are, what they want and if your system is fulfilling their needs is central to UCD. http://tc.eserver.org/19333.html http://tc.eserver.org/19333.html Forms are often an essential element of an application or website. In fact they are the most popular way of gathering information or encouraging user feedback. Given the sort of information that forms are used to collect (such as registering for a service, or placing an order), the importance of ease-of-use hardly needs to be emphasised. These are tasks central to the success of many online businesses. http://tc.eserver.org/19327.html http://tc.eserver.org/19327.html Research and user testing has highlighted certain key guidelines for WAP interface development. Just as with any other device, content, design and navigation must be developed in a way that meets the needs of typical users. Some of the more significant recommendations, within each of these categories, are listed below http://tc.eserver.org/19332.html http://tc.eserver.org/19332.html Inappropriate use of language is one of the most common causes of usability issues in interface design. When using a product (either online or offline) the words used to label functions or buttons are of paramount importance to the user attempting to understand how the object works. After all, these labels are often the only differentiator within a row of identical buttons. If a user has difficulty understanding what these words or labels mean, there is a fundamental problem in mapping functions to their relevant buttons on the interface. If a term is vague, the user is unsure about the resulting action, and if it cannot be understood, it is likely to cause a 'critical' usability error - an inability to complete a simple task. And these difficulties arise surprisingly often - not because users have limited vocabularies, but because designers and developers insist on using terms unfamiliar to them. How does this happen? The one common factor behind every language difficulty is a failure to conduct a user test, or 'phrase audit', with real end-users. http://tc.eserver.org/19330.html http://tc.eserver.org/19330.html It's a well known fact that many users - both novice and expert - have difficulty finding information on websites even when they know it's there somewhere. What is less clearly understood is why - beyond the obvious fact that there is always a challenge involved in enabling access to a huge variety of information from a single entry point. When addressing this challenge, the initial focus often tends to be on the 'navigational' structures, and how the site is mapped and organised. But in reality, users tend to rely less on these navigational aids than some web designers might imagine. Most users are more concerned with achieving their goal than understanding the logical structure of the application they are using, and tend to gravitate towards the content they are looking for by following 'scent', which can best be thought of as a clear signpost to content 'below' through links and content 'above'. http://tc.eserver.org/19325.html http://tc.eserver.org/19325.html There was a time when graphic design - or how things looked at least - was regarded as the most central part of the web experience. A 'good' website, in the eyes of management at least, involved little more than the company message accompanied by attractive pictures, ideally animated as often as possible. Nowadays, we are beginning to realise that whilst design remains a vital differentiator in terms of web experience, it is for very different reasons. Users are by now accustomed to the very highest levels of graphic design work online. This means that whilst a professional approach is essential for any organisation serious about their online presence, on it's own a 'good looking' site is not sufficient. It is in its impact on usability that graphic design is now particularly significant in the online environment. Graphic design, or visual communication, is about more than looks. The way site content is presented will have a significant effect on how easy-to-use it will be. This not only includes questions of appropriate images and styles, but also choice of colour schemes and the way different interface elements are represented. http://tc.eserver.org/19326.html http://tc.eserver.org/19326.html The success of web retailing depends to a large extent on gaining and maintaining the trust of users. 'User experience' certainly includes elements of usability, but it goes beyond this to encompass the entire customer interaction process. When focusing on the online experience, there are certain key recommendations for organisations seeking to improve user experience. http://tc.eserver.org/19331.html http://tc.eserver.org/19331.html WAP technology, which brings text-based online services to the mobile phone, is already causing considerable excitement in European markets. With the focus on 'the mobile Internet' and 'm-commerce', WAP is already being touted as central to the future of 'online' business. Perhaps as a reaction to the hype, some commentators (among them usability 'guru' Jakob Nielsen) are already lining up to burst the WAP bubble. http://tc.eserver.org/19324.html http://tc.eserver.org/19324.html With so much good advice available, and the need for user input being so much a matter of common sense, it seems fair to ask why usability issues are so common amongst websites and applications - even those which have invested significant resources in development. What is it that drives otherwise sensible organisations and businesses to build products and services that are counter-intuitive and actively annoying for many users? The answers to these questions are revealing, in the sense that they illustrate how easily usability can be subverted by alternative agendas. And they highlight the need for a user champion within the organisation, an individual outside any internal interest groups, and potentially the company itself, who acts as a corrective to the forces that can leave usability on the back burner. This list is not one of objections (no time, no money, etc.), most of which are spurious, but rather of explanations for apparently baffling decisions that are often taken without even thinking about the consequences. http://tc.eserver.org/19328.html http://tc.eserver.org/19328.html It is a basic assumption on the web that download times should be kept to a minimum. After all, the longer people are left waiting, the more likely they are to back out (quite literally) of a transaction and look elsewhere for the same service. But despite the general accuracy of this point of view, there is perhaps slightly more to it than this. What frustrates users about slow download times is not so much the wait as the uncertainty. The online environment remains somewhat unreliable - certainly unreliable enough for a user to be unsure that every page request is likely to be successful. In this situation, the lack of ability of the browser to accurately reflect progress is a serious issue in terms of web effectiveness and user satisfaction. http://tc.eserver.org/19323.html http://tc.eserver.org/19323.html On the basis that user-centred design, user testing and other forms of usability engineering are a 'good thing', it is worth asking how they are best integrated into the development process. Specifically, the issue of timing is critical to the successful implementation of a usability strategy. At what stage of development should these techniques be introduced? Of course the answer to that question rather depends on the unique circumstances of each particular project, but the general principle seems to be 'as early as possible' - with the important caveat that any user involvement is better than none, even at a late stage in the day. But the accepted wisdom that usability engineering should be introduced as early as possible in the development process has many arguments in its favour. http://tc.eserver.org/19329.html http://tc.eserver.org/19329.html A Frontend study of mobile phone users highlights four key user requirements for WAP applications. http://tc.eserver.org/19320.html http://tc.eserver.org/19320.html Colour is used in interface design for a variety of purposes. Not only can colour convey meaning or highlight content, it is also an important part of corporate identity and branding. Where would the Coca Cola brand be without its distinctive red and white livery? All well and good, but the reality is that the use of colour can cause more problems than it solves. Interface designers must treat colour with caution for a variety of reasons - most importantly the huge variety of ways in which any given colour can be perceived. It is well known that older users and those with colour-deficit vision may have difficulty in perceiving certain colours. Different monitors may be poor at maintaining colours the same across displays, and of course many users are still working on black and white displays. In this environment, poor use of colour may mean that text is hard to read, eyestrain occurs, and users become frustrated. With this in mind, designers should consider the following guidelines relating to the use of colour in interface design. http://tc.eserver.org/19321.html http://tc.eserver.org/19321.html State-of-the-art usability engineering should eliminate user errors. But in the real world, those users (the majority) who do not read instructions and prefer to 'figure things out as they go' are inevitably going to come unstuck occasionally. In these situations, interface designers must ensure that the feedback provided is as helpful as possible in setting the user back on the right track. Unclear and unhelpful error messages tend to mean that errors will recur, or take longer to resolve. The resultant frustration can lead users to mistrust the interface or even abort the task in question. This result can be disastrous, if for example it happens during the course of an online reservation or purchasing process. http://tc.eserver.org/19315.html http://tc.eserver.org/19315.html English is the official language of approximately eight percent of the worlds population - a significant number, but still a small minority. Yet the majority of online content is presented in English. Naturally, many organisations will want to reach as many prospective worldwide clients and suppliers as possible, but the reality is that a user will always prefer an application that suits their own language and cultural environment. Globalisation refers to everything an organisation should do to ensure that its web presence meets the requirements of users in different countries. Successful globalisation requires tackling a host of both technical and content issues. Back-end systems that interact with your web presence must be reengineered so they can identify and process any language. The web interface and its content must also be translated and culturally modified for a specific language or target environment (a locale). Its a huge topic - here we highlight only some of the key challenges presented to usability by going global. http://tc.eserver.org/19318.html http://tc.eserver.org/19318.html Amongst Internet developers, Macromedia Flash is certainly something of a hot potato. On the one hand, many designers see Flash as a powerful multimedia tool that encourages originality and dynamism on the otherwise 'static' web. Proponents of usability, on the other hand, have argued that the presence of Flash on a website is a 'usability disease', '99% bad' and have even branded it as 'evil'. They ask the obvious question: why do the biggest, most well known and profitable websites in the world decide against using Flash? However, the reality is that although Flash presents many usability issues, it is not inherently unusable. It can be used to create usable websites - but this requires designers to follow strict implementation guidelines. http://tc.eserver.org/19317.html http://tc.eserver.org/19317.html The convergence of the web and television throws up numerous challenges for usability engineers. As more and more of the population choose to access the Internet through their television (usually via set-top boxes and with the assistance of television remote controls), optimizing web pages for use on these devices becomes a priority. These issues tend to be exacerbated by inherent differences between the two technologies. For instance, television is usually thought of as 'lean-back' technology, whereas the computer is seen as 'lean-forward' technology. Television viewers on average sit more than 9 feet away from their sets, whereas computer users are usually within 13 inches of their monitors. Television viewers are accustomed to being passive and having information presented to them. Computer use requires more active interaction and maximizes user initiative. It is possible that the fundamental conflict between these modes of operation will mean that web-on-television is doomed to failure. But, in the meantime, what can be done to ensure high quality user-experience when viewing the web on TV? http://tc.eserver.org/19316.html http://tc.eserver.org/19316.html Most 'usability' practitioners quite rightly put great emphasis on the ease with which sample users can complete pre-selected tasks. After all, it makes sense to ensure that common tasks, identified after research into user needs, should be completed as efficiently as possible. It is when this 'efficiency' is measured that problems can begin. http://tc.eserver.org/19319.html http://tc.eserver.org/19319.html You would be forgiven for thinking that the lifespan of the typical usability project ends with final implementation and a product or website's release into the market. In one sense it does - the user-centred design process is over, and presumably the result is an easy-to-use product or site that is already yielding results. All well and good - but sometimes even the best interfaces cannot meet the changing requirements of the typical workplace. In this case, post-implementation user testing can pick up the difficulties that were not picked up first time around. At this point the client may quite rightly be wondering why these problems weren't spotted before deployment. The reason lies in the way in which the user has developed alongside the product. First impressions, whether favourable or not, may turn out to be misleading after an extended period of use. http://tc.eserver.org/19314.html http://tc.eserver.org/19314.html Unusable interfaces will cost eLearning companies billions of dollars in lost revenues because many people won’t be able to use their products. The US eLearning market has a projected value of $11.5 billion by 2003 while the European market is expected to be worth $4 billion by 2004. However, poor usability will contribute to disappointing results for many eLearning companies, for the following reasons. http://tc.eserver.org/19309.html http://tc.eserver.org/19309.html Whilst some designers would insist that to even contemplate adding a search engine to a site is to admit some sort of failure of interaction design, most would agree that in certain circumstances some form of search facility can be appropriate. Either way, it is an issue that sooner or later is likely to be addressed by many site developers. It is important to recognise that when we speak of a 'search facility' we are often applying one catch-all name to what is in fact many distinct functions. There is a significant difference, for example, between searching for specific items with specific names (such as books in a bookshop) and looking for any documents that contain certain words or phrases. The former is a targeted, 'hard' search, the latter a much more complex 'soft' process that is likely to place greater demands on the user if they are to be successful. Although in terms of interface design and technology these searches may be similar, for the user they are very different processes. http://tc.eserver.org/19304.html http://tc.eserver.org/19304.html As with other interactive media, touch-screen kiosks are designed for many different types of uses - from art piece installations to bus timetables and just about everything in between. But the practice of design for such kiosks demonstrates the importance of understanding hardware considerations and restraints before embarking on interface development. There are aspects to touch-screen technology that make their design fundamentally different to that of desktop applications. Most of these differences revolve around the nature of the input or controlling device. Touch screen kiosks are controlled directly by the user's finger whereas desktop applications are controlled remotely by devices like a mouse or keyboard. Users' fingers and hands vary in size and shape unlike a mouse cursor that stays more or less the same size from machine to machine. This is the primary consideration for design. For the purposes of this article we will concentrate on the touch-screen and the users' interaction with the content of the kiosk. Issues as to the design and usability of the kiosk's hardware or casing (such as height and location) will not be addressed. Before the designer can begin to think what the user might want in terms of content there are more basic concerns. http://tc.eserver.org/19305.html http://tc.eserver.org/19305.html Nokia are the world's leading maker of mobile phones. Their user-centred approach to developing products has been identified as one crucial factor behind this success. 'Nokia starts its planning from what the consumer actually wants while Ericsson and Motorola tend to be more engineering driven' commented Mark Davies Jones of Schroder Solomon Smith Barney. Anecdotal evidence and our own previous observations suggest that consumers find Nokia's mobile phones easier to use than many of their competitors and often take this into account - either consciously or sub-consciously - when making their purchasing decision. Frontend decided to evaluate the usability of a Nokia phone, the popular 3210, against a competitor, the older Siemens C25. We found that the Nokia is significantly easier to use in a number of areas. http://tc.eserver.org/19311.html http://tc.eserver.org/19311.html If there is one subject guaranteed to get two web designers arguing, it is almost certainly personalisation. The promise is obvious - a website tailored to each individual who uses it, highlighting items that will be of interest to his or her particular profile, and consequently saving the users time and providing a superior user experience. http://tc.eserver.org/19303.html http://tc.eserver.org/19303.html Creating navigation systems, and the information structures that underlie them, is obviously a central aspect of the development of any product or web interface. Although some users may prefer not to use navigation systems, or even ignore them entirely, for many they will be an invaluable means of discovering content or functionality. Getting these structures right is an important element in designing a successful interface. Unfortunately, getting them right isn't particularly easy. In some instances it can be, but usually there is no simple way to short-circuit the process of categorisation and presentation that constitutes a navigational system. However, in this short article we do attempt to provide some brief pointers. Although we focus on web navigation, many of these suggestions are equally relevant in software interface design and indeed other technologies. http://tc.eserver.org/19312.html http://tc.eserver.org/19312.html Is your organisation in need of a user champion? It might not be the perfect solution, but as a first step it can have far-reaching consequences. If your organisation already has significant resources assisting with interface development, but tends to make key decisions on the basis of hunches or personal opinions, a single individual with a remit to judge the interface from the users point of view may be beneficial. Of course, any appointment must be more than a gesture. A user champion must be confident of management support and fully involved in the development and design process, at every stage. http://tc.eserver.org/19307.html http://tc.eserver.org/19307.html Slowly but surely the importance of 'user experience' to any e-commerce initiative is being understood. It is becoming apparent that simply ensuring that the goods are in the shop and the customers can find the door is not enough in the ultra-competitive online environment. 'User experience' is the difference between one-time visitors and satisfied repeat customers. It is also the area in which e-businesses can learn most from their offline equivalents. 'User experience' certainly includes elements of usability, but it goes beyond this to encompass the entire customer interaction process. But focusing on the online experience, there are certain key recommendations for organisations seeking to improve user experience. http://tc.eserver.org/19310.html http://tc.eserver.org/19310.html The following is an attempt to outline a charter of rights for the user of web applications. They are, of course, unenforceable but compliance with them would represent best practice in the design of user-centred interfaces. More significantly, any violation of the charter would indicate the presence of significant usability problems detrimental to the user experience. And failing to address the requirements of the user leads to frustration, irritation and consequently lost business. http://tc.eserver.org/19298.html http://tc.eserver.org/19298.html The Internet hype may be dying down, but one area in which productivity gains can still be a reality is intranet development. Intranets could hardly be described as the sexy end of web development, but many companies around the world are experiencing real value from improved efficiency in terms of internal communications. Intranets can be big business. But unfortunately, Intranets often illustrate everything that is worst in web design. I imagine most readers of this article will be familiar with those corporate Intranets that become little more than a collection of department websites, each with its own navigational structure, look and feel, and content. Some organisations even pride themselves on this laissez faire approach to Intranet development, seeing the intranet as an opportunity for departments to express themselves online. http://tc.eserver.org/19300.html http://tc.eserver.org/19300.html It is something of a given in the usability industry that testing with real users is the most effective way of identifying interface issues that may cause usability problems. Whilst it is true that testing is the best way to get real feedback on user experience with a site or application, there is an argument that evaluation by an expert is an equally efficient way to identify these problems. For some reason, the process of expert evaluation in usability circles has acquired the name 'heuristic evaluation', a term that is largely inaccurate in this context and certainly confusing for those unfamiliar with the jargon. However, that is a different story. Here we are more concerned with the pros and cons of expert evaluation as compared with user testing. http://tc.eserver.org/19283.html http://tc.eserver.org/19283.html Of all the disciplines that go together to create a 'usability strategy', user requirement gathering is undoubtedly the most frequently misunderstood. Many product managers or webmasters will believe that they already know their users, perhaps because they have conducted some form of market research, or have a formal complaints and customer feedback programme in place. However, these techniques, discussed below, although similar in aspiration, should not be relied upon as a replacement for a full user-requirement gathering programme. That isn't to say that they do not have their uses of course, but rather that in terms of assisting in application or site design they can be unhelpful or even misleading. http://tc.eserver.org/19290.html http://tc.eserver.org/19290.html Usability testing is a powerful tool in identifying problems and issues that users may have with a website or software application. But for all its benefits, traditional testing does not necessarily give a complete picture at how effective a site or application is in terms of meeting business goals. http://tc.eserver.org/19295.html http://tc.eserver.org/19295.html Why is usability such an important factor in the success of e-business developments? A key concept in understanding the value of usability is often called the 'conversion rate'. Simply put, it represents the percentage of unique visitors who go on to interact with the site in a pre-defined way. Usually this means make a purchase, but depending on the site in question it could mean registering for more information, placing a bet or opening an account. Conversion rates are usually low. That isn't particularly surprising - they are low in almost any industry, online or offline. What is particularly relevant in the context of usability is the huge benefits that a small change in the rate can offer. http://tc.eserver.org/19296.html http://tc.eserver.org/19296.html In an ideal world help text would be unnecessary - users would never get stuck in an application or site. It should be enough to provide clear design, carefully chosen titles and labels for the various functions, appropriate field prompts when user entry is required, helpful feedback, a glossary, and 'embedded' help such as default values, example input, on-screen step-by-step instructions and explanatory text next to fields or functions. Help features should certainly be a last resort. Anyone embarking on adding it to an application or site should be sure that they have already followed the best practise listed above. In most cases (certainly online) a help option should not be necessary. http://tc.eserver.org/19288.html http://tc.eserver.org/19288.html Scalable interface design ensures that interface development takes account of the need to change over time, providing solutions that are flexible and thus 'future-proof' to some extent. Too often complex interface designs require a complete overhaul when even the smallest change is required in the functionality of the application or site in question. Building 'scalable' interfaces in the first place will save time and cost in the long term - and make coping with upgrades easier for your customers. http://tc.eserver.org/19291.html http://tc.eserver.org/19291.html Obviously it isn’t true that download times don’t matter. Presumably the research methods used to arrive at such conclusions are flawed in some way – or alternatively Jared is so keen to convey the importance of other factors than simple speed of download (a noble aim in itself) that he is willing to inaccurately dismiss download speeds as completely irrelevant. Either way, this kind of statement is hardly a good advertisement for the usability industry. http://tc.eserver.org/19294.html http://tc.eserver.org/19294.html Good alt text can be a useful tool for enhancing the web interface. It provides supporting information, helping users gain an understanding of the structure web pages and an insight into the behaviour of key controls and interactive elements. 'ALT' is a HTML tag. It adds a short line of text to an image, usually for descriptive purposes. If you are using a mouse and you 'hover” the pointer over an image on a web page, you will notice that a short line of text appears - this is the alt text. You should also see the alt text if you switch off the images on your browser - the images have been replaced by 'placeholders” and the same short line of text which appeared when you hovered the mouse over the image. http://tc.eserver.org/19284.html http://tc.eserver.org/19284.html In the near future the number of mobile Internet access devices will surpass the number of PCs in the world. This obviously has a number of implications for the future of the Internet and what form it will take in this changed environment. A recent article in the Economist compares the transition to that from the telegraph to the ‘speaking telegraph’, or what we now call the telephone. In both instances a technology which had been the preserve of specialist operators was passed into the hands of the public. And in both cases, this transition caused huge changes despite the underlying technology remaining largely unchanged. New usage models emerged as the user base changed. http://tc.eserver.org/19285.html http://tc.eserver.org/19285.html Search engine position is an important element of online marketing. Obviously your company is at a significant advantage if you come top of a search for ‘cheese’ (assuming you are a cheesemonger that is – if you aren’t you have a problem). Not only will this drive traffic to the site, but this traffic is also highly targeted, being people who have already expressed an interest in your product or service. Given that this is the case, a whole industry has developed around ‘optimising’ a site’s position on these search rankings. In the past, most search engines have referred to the HTML itself in order to judge how relevant a site is to any particular search. So our hypothetical cheesemonger would be advised to include the word ‘cheese’ in the Title, meta tags, content and header of his or her homepage, whilst avoiding elements such as frames and splash pages which may confuse the automatic 'spiders' which collect this information. http://tc.eserver.org/19293.html http://tc.eserver.org/19293.html Usability, and professional interface design, is often presented as a long-term strategy for those involved in software development. There is a common perception that as effective as user-centred interface design can be in terms of creating satisfied end-users, brand loyalty, and repeat business, it lacks something of the ‘wow’ factor and will not affect the bottom line in the short term. In our experience, nothing could be further from the truth. Particularly in today’s software market, many of our customers report significant and immediate improvements in terms of product sales. It doesn’t take long to figure out why. The typical software sales process could almost have been designed to favour those products that present a clear, intuitive, attractive and easy-to-use interface to the user. http://tc.eserver.org/19281.html http://tc.eserver.org/19281.html More than one reader has pointed out that our recent article 'Alternatives To User Requirement Gathering' spent plenty of time illustrating why certain methods were inappropriate for the task of requirement gathering, without actually detailing the correct way to undertake this type of research. In way of compensation, this week we provide some (brief) advice on this absolutely crucial area to successful application or site development. http://tc.eserver.org/19287.html http://tc.eserver.org/19287.html There is no doubt about it – usability is now a mainstream concern of those charged with managing the development of a website. The benefits that accrue from taking a user-centred perspective, and involving those users in the design process itself, have convinced large sectors of the industry that ‘usability’ is something they want. Unsurprisingly, given the demand, usability is also something that on the surface is in plentiful supply. Any web development company who knows the market will be reassuring their customers that they ‘do’ usability – just as two years ago they did video streaming and flash animation. Many of these companies will do a good job, but others are merely jumping on the bandwagon. http://tc.eserver.org/19282.html http://tc.eserver.org/19282.html Regular web users will almost certainly be aware of an increasing amount of ‘invasive’ advertising appearing online. A variety of methods are now being used to make online advertising almost unavoidable for the user. http://tc.eserver.org/19279.html http://tc.eserver.org/19279.html Should usability work be provided by external consultancies or provided in-house? This is a question that we often encounter when working with clients, many of whom are keen to establish their own usability departments. Of course there is no short answer – depending on the client’s situation either alternative may be valid. But there are good reasons for thinking carefully before making a decision either way. http://tc.eserver.org/19280.html http://tc.eserver.org/19280.html As in any downturn, most businesses are examining expenditure and looking to cut back in any areas that may not be deemed essential. For better or worse, spending on usability engineering is often under the spotlight in this environment. There may be a feeling that the company has survived without such flights of fancy in the past, and can no doubt do so in the future – ‘usability’ is a luxury that can be done without. http://tc.eserver.org/19286.html http://tc.eserver.org/19286.html One industry that seems to be weathering the current online storm – and which has a reputation of being ‘recession proof’ in any case – is bookmaking. A combination of established offline players (William Hill, Ladbrokes and Paddy Power for example) and online-only companies (such as Blue Square) continue to provide plenty of choice to punters. This in itself is hardly surprising, as bookmaking is one industry tailor-made for the Internet environment. http://tc.eserver.org/19289.html http://tc.eserver.org/19289.html Improving ‘brand experience’ online is not normally regarded as the primary goal of a usability strategy. In some circles usability and branding would even be seen as mutually exclusive, based on the assumption that successful branding relies on ever more garish visual design and an extensive use of animation, audio streaming, or whatever the latest cutting-edge technology might happen to be. http://tc.eserver.org/19292.html http://tc.eserver.org/19292.html In CRM, user acceptance is a huge issue. End users, who are rarely the same people who choose applications in the first place, can be extraordinarily resourceful when it comes to undermining or working around new products or implementations introduced by manager. All this means that creating applications that are efficient and enjoyable to use is imperative for both ISVs and CRM implementers. http://tc.eserver.org/19278.html http://tc.eserver.org/19278.html As usability professionals and user interface designers, our work is mainly contained within the confines of the computer screen - the GUI or web-based software interface. Interaction touch points outside of this window are usually beyond our control. For example, it would not be practical (or advisable) to suggest redesigning the mouse in order to make a software application or website easier to use. We accept the limitations of these devices and we design interfaces to compensate or compliment them. However, as software interfaces migrate from the computer to become embedded in a multitude of everyday products, the scope to consider the hardware interface and the software interface under one unified approach becomes a possibility and a necessity. http://tc.eserver.org/19037.html http://tc.eserver.org/19037.html Frontend has recently completed the delivery of the first version (1.1) of the Irish National Disability Authority (NDA) IT Accessibility Guidelines. In the course of our work for the NDA over the last year we’ve talked to a wide variety groups and individuals who have an interest in accessibility and as a result of their input, our approach has shifted a little. Here’s what we found out. http://tc.eserver.org/19043.html http://tc.eserver.org/19043.html At the outset of an interface design project we would normally conduct a detailed phase of user requirements gathering. We have discussed the various methods of conducting these in previous articles, but typically this includes stakeholder interviews and task analysis exercises. As many of you will be aware the results of this stage will lead to the development of user personas, task scenarios and ultimately lead to the development of wireframe screens of the interface. We tailor this approach to suit the job, so that specialised interfaces such as stock trading software will focus more on complex task analysis while mass-market interfaces such as Interactive TV will focus more on different user profiles. If the research and analysis is carried out well, then the resulting interaction design should be effective, allowing users to complete the required tasks easily. However, apart from the user and task there is one other key factor influencing the usability of the interface – the user environment. http://tc.eserver.org/19040.html http://tc.eserver.org/19040.html Once an organisation decides to go ahead with a user testing programme, the questions really begin. Is it really necessary to undertake testing in a 'usability lab'? And what exactly should a fully functioning lab consist of anyway? As one might imagine, opinion is divided on these issues. We take a quick look at what a typical lab might consist of and the pros and cons of lab-based testing. http://tc.eserver.org/19048.html http://tc.eserver.org/19048.html At the heart of any good user-centred design process is the practice of prototyping. By creating and testing interfaces in rough format, designers are able to feed through improvements and feedback from users quickly and easily. This in turn helps to ensure a final product that is an evolved solution, in the sense that it has been through a number of iterations and emerged as fit for the job in question. http://tc.eserver.org/19041.html http://tc.eserver.org/19041.html It used to be a given (amongst those in the know at least) that ‘micropayments’ were the only sustainable business model for those providing content on the web. Micropayments work by charging a tiny amount for access to web content, and are touted as the alternative to giving content away for free (which doesn’t make any money) or charging for subscriptions (which is unlikely to appeal to Internet users now accustomed to freedom of movement online. The theory goes that small amounts to each individual consumer will add up to sufficient funds to keep online publishing firms in business. In recent times, however, any consensus there was surrounding micropayments as ‘the way forward’ has begun to dissolve. There is a growing feeling that the slow introduction of this method of payment is less to do with technical constraints than user requirements. Put simply – micropayments are not emerging as a ‘web standard’ because users dislike them. There are certainly a number of good arguments against their implementation. http://tc.eserver.org/19036.html http://tc.eserver.org/19036.html Once the information on a web page has been made, strictly speaking, accessible to assistive technologies, the question then becomes whether or not that site is 'easy-to-use' for people with impairments. It is not always enough to retrofit accessibility features to a pre-existing site that was designed without considering the needs of these users. http://tc.eserver.org/19045.html http://tc.eserver.org/19045.html There are two superlative facts about Dublin City’s traffic situation. The first is that a recent study has shown us to have the second worse traffic congestion problem in the world (my condolences to any readers that have to drive through Calcutta on a Monday morning) and the second is that we are, or rather were, the proud possessors of the shortest lived traffic signage system in the world. The signs lasted a mere 24 hours before the Minister for transport ordered these signs be removed. Why were they removed? The answer is usability, or lack of usability to be more precise. Unsuspecting motorists were unable to figure out what the signs were trying to tell them. There were several usability problems with the signs, and many of these have been covered in the media so I won’t cover that ground again. But for any of you that are unfamiliar with the story, the major complaints levelled at them were: they had too much information on them to read at a glance; the format of the information was unfamiliar to everyone (except the people that designed them); tommon place-names were replaced by a system of numbers and colour coding, requiring users to consult maps to establish where they were and where they were heading; the information was difficult to read – too many graphic elements and poor colour contrast; some of the information was only available in the Irish language (contrary to EU standards) and the reason given was that there was not enough space for the English text, so visiting motorists would have to guess that ‘An Lar’ means ‘City Centre’! Having looked at the signs during their brief career on the streets, I would have to agree with the complaints listed above. But at this juncture, rather than raking over old coals, lets examine what Dublin City Council can do to rectify the situation and what steps can be taken to ensure that these mistakes are not repeated in the new design. http://tc.eserver.org/19049.html http://tc.eserver.org/19049.html Text-only websites are not suited to all users with impairments. Although they are often ideal for users who are blind and use a screen reader, accessibility goes far beyond this user group. http://tc.eserver.org/19047.html http://tc.eserver.org/19047.html The concept of the 'persona' has interesting implications for software design. It is particularly effective for reminding designers of the importance of designing for an individual, rather than the population at large. Without a concrete impression of who exactly the user is, it is easy for designers to add features continuously because 'the user' demands them. For 'user', read 'marketing department'. http://tc.eserver.org/19042.html http://tc.eserver.org/19042.html Usability does not begin and end with the web. In fact, long before the Internet was a gleam in the Pentagon's eye, computer professionals were already aware of the need for human-computer interaction to be as natural and intuitive as possible. In fact, there are many compelling reasons to suggest that usability is even more critical to successful application design than it is for winning websites. http://tc.eserver.org/19044.html http://tc.eserver.org/19044.html An Interactive Voice Response (IVR) application is any telephone-based application which interactively takes input from callers and returns output in the form of a previously recorded human voice or other auditory information (Noonan). Cost and efficiency considerations means that IVR applications are fast becoming a common supplement, or indeed alternative, to direct contact with customer service representatives. The principles of User-Centred Design can be applied to make a more efficient and intuitive IVR applications. A solely auditory interface means that the user can hear only one thing at a time. The interface is sequential. With visual interfaces, like computer screens, it is possible to emphasise content through fonts or colour. The user can review any part of the screen at a glance. Therefore, the manner and order in which information is rendered on an IVR application is very important. The following are some guidelines for the design of an intuitive IVR application. http://tc.eserver.org/19038.html http://tc.eserver.org/19038.html 8% of the U.S. population has visual, learning, cognitive, auditory or physical dexterity disabilities severe enough to affect their ability to access the Web. These people use the web for the same reasons as everyone else - email, news, sports results, research, work. Recently introduced legislation and some high-profile legal cases are increasing the profile of website accessibility. E-commerce organisations and government bodies can no longer afford to be complacent about the issues surrounding accessibility. http://tc.eserver.org/19046.html http://tc.eserver.org/19046.html As we have pointed out before, understanding the user is a pre-requisite of high quality interface design, whether online or offline. This means taking the time to find out what motivates typical user groups, what they expect from a given site or application, and how they prefer to work (or play). The alternative to proper user profiling is simply plucking an imaginary 'user' out of the air - usually to add weight to personal preferences or prejudices. The latter situation often consists of a so-called expert dismissing design features because 'the user wouldn't like it', when he or she is really saying 'I don't like it'. This common reference to a single undefined 'user' conjures up amusing images of a God-like entity casting judgment on interfaces from on high. In the real world, as we know, things are a little more complex. If 'the user' is frequently invoked but never defined, it may be time to rethink your usability strategy. Of course, after profiling has taken place, or when talking in generalities, there is nothing wrong with 'the user' being used as a convenient shorthand. But during specific projects it is essential to think in terms of real people rather than abstracts. This approach creates both better design and makes usability more understandable, in concrete terms, for others involved in the development process. http://tc.eserver.org/19039.html http://tc.eserver.org/19039.html Bobby is an online testing tool which has been developed to help developers assess web sites for accessibility. It is a free service provided by CAST (Centre for Applied Special Technology), a non-profit organisation which aims to expand opportunities for people with disabilities through computer technology. Bobby looks at the underlying HTML code that controls the presentation of a web page and analyses it against the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) guidelines. Many organizations genuinely believe that if their site passes the Bobby test and displays the Bobby icon, it is 'accessible.' In many ways, this is an understandable outlook. The 'Bobby Approved' icon represents an achievable standard and a tangible, recognisable endorsement of efforts made towards web accessibility. However, it should be remembered that the Bobby test does not ensure true 'accessibility.'