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

No content

TOP 5 7 REASONS YOUR WEBSITE SUCKS 

No content

IT’S NOT DESIGNED FOR THE END USER 

•  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 

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

•  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 

YOU USE FLASH 

•  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/ 

IT’S TOO BUSY 

•  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 

IT’S NOT CURRENT 

•  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 

IT’S NOT MOBILIZED OR RESPONSIVE 

•  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 

PDFS ARE USED INSTEAD OF PAGES TO DISSEMINATE INFORMATION 

•  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 

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

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/ 

Weill Cornell Medical College 

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 

Bad Point It does not adhere to accessibility standards 

Bad Point Lack of navigaNon bar 

Bad Point Too much informaNon 

Bad Point It uses a carousel 

Bad Point Mobilized But Not Responsive 

Lane Medical College 

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 

Bad Point RepeNNon 

Bad Point How to find informaNon is buried 

Bad Point CollecNon/Archives Not Separated Out 

Bad Point Mobile But Not Responsive 

Bad Point It does not adhere to accessibility standards 

Yale Medical Library 

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 

Bad Point Uses Google for search 

Bad Point Use of carousel 

Bad Point It does not adhere to accessibility standards 

Bad Point RepeNNon 

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 

No content

HOW TO CHANGE LIBRARY USERS PERCEPTION OF YOUR WEBSITE 

CONDUCT USABILITY STUDIES 

MAKE YOUR SITE ACCESSIBLE 

UTILIZE WEB STANDARDS 

QUESTIONS?