Why "Your" Website Sucks

Transcript

1. Why Your* (Library)
   Website Sucks
   Lisa Rabey
   h7p://lisa.rabey.net
   December 4, 2015
   *general “you”
   

   View Slide

2. View Slide

3. TOP 5 7 REASONS YOUR
   WEBSITE SUCKS
   

   View Slide

4. View Slide

5. IT’S NOT DESIGNED FOR THE END
   USER
   

   View Slide

6. •  Accessibility
   •  e.g. Those who are visually impaired cannot navigate your site with assisNve
   technologies (screen readers, speech recogniNon)
   •  It assumes all users are not visually or hearing impaired
   •  Too many cooks in the kitchen
   •  Development is dictated by those who have an idea on how the site should work/
   look as opposed to how the user engages with the site
   •  It does not remember those who have already visited the site
   •  Cookies, and other technologies, can be deployed to remember if you’ve been to
   that site or not.
   •  e.g Sites that conNnually use popups to remind you to sign up for this, sign up for
   that even though you have visited the site a million Nmes
   •  No contact informaNon, address, or hours
   •  Lack of navigaNon bar
   •  Branding and design is inconsistent with the rest of the site
   •  Your site is not responsive or mobilized
   •  URLs do not tell the user what site/page they are on
   •  The landing page is too long
   •  Does not uNlize breadcrumbs
   

   View Slide

7. IT CONTAINS A CAROUSEL*
   *HTTP://SHOULDIUSEACAROUSEL.COM/
   

   View Slide

8. •  AutomaNc image sliders, or carousels, are the
   pox on those who uses it
   •  AutomaNc image sliders are typically placed on
   the front page with “important” images/content
   that rotates in a single space
   •  Roughly 1% of users click on one of those
   features
   •  It poorly represents content on the page
   •  Carousels do not meet accessibility requirements
   

   View Slide

9. YOU USE FLASH
   

   View Slide

10. •  Flash is not supported on (most) mobile devices
    –  As of October 2014, 64% of Americans own a smartphone
    and as of January 2014, 42% of Americans own a tablet*
    •  Using Flash means you’re losing over 50% of your web traffic
    •  Flash is not indexed by Google
    •  It is more expensive to develop
    •  It is a proprietary so`ware, owned by Adobe, which
    means your end users will have to use a plugin to view
    the content
    •  Flash is dead, long live Flash
    *h7p://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/mobile-technology-fact-sheet/
    

    View Slide

11. IT’S TOO BUSY
    

    View Slide

12. •  Content is slap dashed across the landing page
    •  Content is repeated
    •  Inconsistent font sizes and colors
    •  It’s too distracNng
    •  Content and imagery are in compeNNon with
    each other
    •  Not enough white space
    –  White space (negaNve space) is space that is
    unmarked by content or images
    

    View Slide

13. IT’S NOT CURRENT
    

    View Slide

14. •  Content is outdated and irrelevant
    •  Social media content is not/under uNlized
    •  Design is outmoded
    •  It’s not designed for modern browsers
    – Internet Explorer is dead. Long live Internet
    Explorer.
    •  It does not use redirects
    – Clicking on an old link automaNcally takes you to
    the correct page rather giving you a 404
    

    View Slide

15. IT’S NOT MOBILIZED
    OR RESPONSIVE
    

    View Slide

16. •  Mobilized means the site can be viewed easily on
    a smartphone or tablet
    –  Remember, 64% of Americans have a smartphone and
    42% of Americans have a tablet
    •  Responsive means the site will remain as
    designed when the browser is resized
    •  Mobile and responsive sites can adhere to
    accessibility standards
    •  Be careful of creaNng a mobile app (as opposed
    to making your website mobile) due to reasons
    above
    

    View Slide

17. PDFS ARE USED INSTEAD OF PAGES
    TO DISSEMINATE INFORMATION
    

    View Slide

18. •  PDFs are a proprietary format (Again, Adobe)
    •  They cannot be mobilized or responsive
    •  Are not HTML subsNtutes
    •  This is not saNre:
    •  They cannot be indexed by search engines
    •  Content cannot be measured
    –  e.g. How users are accessing and using the informaNon
    •  They cannot be updated or reused without creaNng a new PDF
    

    View Slide

19. It’s 2015. Why are you not
    thinking about your end users?
    

    View Slide

20. Websites Evaluated
    •  Weil Cornell Medical College
    – h7p://library.med.cornell.edu/
    •  Lane Medical Library, Stanford
    – h7ps://lane.stanford.edu/
    •  Harvey Crushing / John Hay Whitney Medical
    Library
    – h7p://library.medicine.yale.edu/
    

    View Slide

21. Weill Cornell Medical College
    

    View Slide

22. Good Points
    •  Branding is consistent with the medical college’s site and the library’s child pages
    •  Search box is easily found
    •  Contact informaNon is on the landing page
    •  A summary of the blog/news feed is on the landing page
    •  Library services are on the landing page
    •  It has a list of related links within the Cornell network
    

    View Slide

23. Bad Point
    It does not adhere to accessibility standards
    

    View Slide

24. Bad Point
    Lack of navigaNon bar
    

    View Slide

25. Bad Point
    Too much informaNon
    

    View Slide

26. Bad Point
    It uses a carousel
    

    View Slide

27. Bad Point
    Mobilized But Not Responsive
    

    View Slide

28. Lane Medical College
    

    View Slide

29. Good Points
    •  Branding and design is consistent with the medical college
    •  Contact and locaNon are easily found on the landing page
    •  Search box is prominent
    •  News/blog is prominent on the landing page
    •  Quick access to popular materials
    

    View Slide

30. Bad Point
    RepeNNon
    

    View Slide

31. Bad Point
    How to find informaNon is buried
    

    View Slide

32. Bad Point
    CollecNon/Archives Not Separated Out
    

    View Slide

33. Bad Point
    Mobile But Not Responsive
    

    View Slide

34. Bad Point
    It does not adhere to accessibility standards
    

    View Slide

35. Yale Medical Library
    

    View Slide

36. Good Points
    •  Single scroll
    •  Responsive and mobilized
    •  Contact informaNon/hours readily available on the landing
    page
    •  Search and navigaNon bars are easily available
    •  Links to Yale sites within their network
    •  Good use of white space
    •  InformaNon does not compete for a7enNon
    

    View Slide

37. Bad Point
    Uses Google for search
    

    View Slide

38. Bad Point
    Use of carousel
    

    View Slide

39. Bad Point
    It does not adhere to accessibility standards
    

    View Slide

40. Bad Point
    RepeNNon
    

    View Slide

41. To Sum
    •  2 out of 3 sites used red/white as the main color choices
    –  Those with red-green color blindness see reds as yellow, oranges, or beige
    •  2 out of 3 sites scrolled beyond 1 page
    •  2 out of 3 sites had too much informaNon on the landing page
    •  1 out of 3 provided a library calendar
    •  Not enough white space
    •  InformaNon is disorganized
    •  No federated search
    •  Load Nmes varied: Cornell at 3 seconds, Stanford and Yale at 1.5 seconds,
    •  Social media is uNlized and current
    •  Use of PDFs to disseminate informaNon
    •  Use of carousels
    •  Flash was not used
    •  Sites rendered correctly in various browsers (Safari, Firefox, Chrome)
    •  All three sites averaged 3-4 clicks to get informaNon. Users should be able to find informaNon
    within 1-2 clicks
    •  None of the sites uNlized breadcrumbs
    •  1 out of 3 uNlized SSL
    

    View Slide

42. View Slide

43. HOW TO CHANGE LIBRARY USERS
    PERCEPTION OF YOUR WEBSITE
    

    View Slide

44. CONDUCT USABILITY STUDIES
    

    View Slide

45. MAKE YOUR SITE ACCESSIBLE
    

    View Slide

46. UTILIZE WEB STANDARDS
    

    View Slide

47. QUESTIONS?
    

    View Slide