Designing a Web site includes three distinct but interacting phases:
Some otherwise attractive conceptual designs or visual layouts will falter in practice because of the difficulty of one or both of the other phases, especially the difficulty of communicating through terse text exactly what will be found if one follows a particular choice. The current design of the Ohio University Front Door has room for enhancement in this respect (e.g., many people do not immediately recognize "find" as "keyword search").
A solid, well designed web page is the ultimate first impression. Hundreds of thousands of people all around the world will see your page. Your page will not only reflect upon yourself and your department, but also on your institution as a whole.
The long-term effort will be less if you invest some time in planning your web pages in advance, tempting though it may be to just jump right in and start writing.
There are five stages to your planning effort, all of which are paper and pencil tasks:
These can be difficult decisions. Many departments and offices have a plethora of information just aching to be put on the web. Many departments have brochures and advertisements that would lend themselves perfectly to the web. It can be a difficult job sorting through all of the available materials and choosing what should go on the Web, and what should not. Making the decisions as to what should be changed, what can be enhanced, what can be directly copied, etc., can take a long time.
You don't need to include all the links that will seem appropriate as the project progresses, but you should plan out the links that define the overall organization of the pages, and which, therefore, provide people with the feeling that they know where they are going as they navigate through your pages.
For example, the fundamental structure of this set of pages is what I refer to as the "wagon wheel": the Roadmap functions as the hub, with the spokes being the links from it to the several pages and from each of them the "CONTENTS" link back to the Roadmap. The "BACK" and "NEXT" (circumferential) links correspond to the rim of the wheel.
The only good thing about this list of sins is that some of them are sins of omission and some are sins of comission -- that is, the errors can reasonably be expected to partially offset each other.
If a page is heavily visited, you do not know whether that is
Although usage statistics are intrinsically limited in their accuracy, they are often the only available information, so they should be considered, but with caution.
Goals 1 and 2 are always in conflict. For example, the textured image below is 26,667 bytes, but the image with the uniform background is only 10,273 bytes, less than half the size:
Goals 3 and 4 are always in conflict. For example, to navigate among the 40,000-plus Web pages at Ohio University requires a minimum of 5 navigational layers, but that only works if there are a dozen choices at each layer. If the layers were simpler, with only two choices at each point, it would require 16 layers of navigation! For most Web sites, the navigational layers' pages should offer between four and eight choices.
If we follow goal 5 but don't pay attention to goals 6 and 7, we would end up with most of our audience frustrated by having to choose between using a generic home page as a starting point that requires an extra layer of navigation to reach any content pages, on the one hand, or, on the other hand, using a specific home page as a starting point that is often one click closer, but sometimes requires going back up to the generic home page and down an alternate path. One way around this would be to have all the audience-specific pages be like the generic home page, except with the choices in a different sequence, and with perhaps a few choices at or near the top that are "promoted" from the second or third layer of the generic set. For example, have "Admissions and Financial Aid" as one button on the generic home page, and have four of the choices from that sub-page all be on the "Prospective Students" home page. This does run the risk of compromising goals 1, 4, and 7.
Goal 8 is often in conflict with goal 9 and with many Web authors' temptations to display mastery of new technology, such as frames, tables, animated graphics, JavaScript, and Java applets. ("If you have a hammer, all problems look like nails.") "Fragile" is the word I use to describe designs that fail to meet goal 8.
You ignore the mutually contradictory nature of these design goals only at your peril. If you keep these issues consciously in mind, you are much more likely to make appropriate compromises among them.
Dick Piccard revised this file (http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~piccard/oacrao98/goals.htm) on November 3, 1998.
Please send comments or suggestions to piccard@ohio.edu.