Web Design - The Ultimate Balancing Act?
December 10, 2003 | 
11 Comments
If you’ve read Asterisk* for any length of time chances are you’ve heard me philosophize about Web design in some way or other. I’ve pointed out that Web design isn’t the same as graphic design, that Web design has no rules and is never perfect.
For the most part I stand wholeheartedly behind these assertions. I mean, if you can show me a perfect Web site I’ll come over to your house and pull a unicorn out of my ass. No, as much as I believe what I say, I know that there are all sorts of opinions on these subjects and what is really interesting is to read the comments and discuss the issues these topics bring up.
Web professionals of every stripe loooove to debate things. It’s almost a prerequisite to work on the Web. Whether it be job titles or semantics, technology or methodology — we’re always bickering over something.
Think about it. Liquid vs. Fixed. Flash vs. HTML. Tabled vs. tableless. Form vs. Function. I could go on. Forever.
As a Web professional I seem to be constantly pitting one thing against another. It’s very rare that I make a decision on something that doesn’t have an effect on something else. To achieve successful Web sites it takes balance.
It’s much easier said than done. I’ll give you an example. Recently I talked about using dates for featured and recently updated content, a “guideline” I feel is very important.
Today I was doing an audit of Asterisk* (something I do in lieu of actual user testing on this site - but that is another post) and I decided that I wanted to add dates to the links on the sidebar for my recent entries and my recently asked questions.
The thing is, the sidebar is really, really long as it is and if I decided to add these dates it would only get longer. I also wasn’t all that happy with the way it looked. I thought about it for quite a while and decided that the benefit of adding dates outweighed any additional scroll and the fact that I felt it looked a bit funny.
This is a small thing, true, but these small things add up. Web sites change and evolve. Especially the ones worth putting any thought into. I ask myself all the time if it’s time for a redesign. I mean I have issues that need addressing that I didn’t have at the time this design was put into place. I don’t think that time has come.
I have to balance my resources against the perceived benefit of a redesign. I ask myself if my users need it or is it just me? A redesign is a risk. Just ask Scrivs, who is doing a very interesting public redesign. I’m quite sure he’s learning that with every design decision there are pros and cons and that even if he builds the best possible site there will be someone who prefers the old version.
Worse yet, you make a change to the site or finish a redesign whose goal was increased usability only to find that — because your users spent so much time using the old site — your changes are perceived as less usable than what you had before!
Even if you’re doing the “right” thing and have user data to back that up, you have to weigh the effect of a change (no matter how good) on your users. What once sounded like a great idea might not look so good after it’s thought all the way through.
User goals, personal goals, organizational goals and the rest rarely act in concert. Sometimes they’ll compliment each other (if you’re lucky) but more often one will have to give way to another in some aspect. Knowing how to squeeze out the best possible benefit of a design decision for all goals is an important skill for any Web designer to have.
If you’re working on a Web design and everything seems to be falling into place chances are you’re doing something wrong. Also, if you think you “get” the Web — think again. I honestly believe that one way you can measure the success of your effort is by how much of a pain in the ass the site you’re working on is.
Web design is easy. Good Web design is very, very hard.
Filed under: Web Design
Comments
1. Pat said:
I was dealing with a similar problem using dates on one of my sites.
The solution I came up with, was to add the date to a title attribute for each link. That way, you get to keep the date information and help reduce the visual clutter on the sidebar.
The weblog links on the left hand side are using this method (well not the first 2 links but thats another story): tribe.noizex.com
Posted on December 10, 2003 10:10 PM | #
2. Scrivs said:
I am starting to cringe at the word redesign nowadays. A lot of personal websites do redesigns simply for a change in the look of the site. Even though I was growing wary of the look of my site I also wasn’t pleased with the site’s structure. I knew the user patterns for my site and thought that its architecture could better cater to the way my users actually used the site. Of course the redesign hasn’t pleased everyone, but I have been fortunate enough that it does seem to be pleasing most.
However, I am starting to understand why major sites are more reluctant to do redesigns, but instead do minor upgrades to their site. If you look carefully you can see Yahoo! in the process of that right now. Even personal websites begin to develop their own brand with users and once you redesign you almost have to reestablish your brand all over again.
As you mentioned in your post it was a constant debate. The joys of design!
When doing something minor like adding dates to the sidebar things are okay. However, if you begin to continue to add little things, without taking anything away, you can begin to see your site becoming the next Yahoo.
Posted on December 11, 2003 02:05 AM | #
3. Keith said:
Ahh, and therein lies the balance.
Posted on December 11, 2003 10:10 AM | #
4. Dunstan said:
I can’t tell you the hours I’ve sat here agonising over my sidebar, it’s rediculous! :op
The site that I think gets it right, is http://www.clagnut.com/
I love those sidebars, they let him present lots of info without scrolling all over the place.
Why don’t your run 2 side bars here? There’s loads of room… maybe have the new one wrap under the current one if the the window gets too narrow?
Posted on December 11, 2003 01:42 PM | #
5. Keith said:
Yeah, Clagnut is great.
I’ve thought about running two sidebars but frankly I’m not convinced it would be worth the effort it would take. At least not at the moment.
In anycase, I feel that what I’ve got going now, though rather long, is alright. I’ve never seen a user actually have a problem with scrolling either, so I’m not sure how beneficial it would be anyway.
It’s a good idea thought and one I’ll keep in mind if I ever decided to redesign.
Posted on December 11, 2003 02:27 PM | #
6. ben said:
Keith,
What about putting the dates in the title attribute of the link? Saves your precious real estate, but from a usability/usefulness perspective, the info is still readily available. Granted many people probably dont think to hover over a link and see what the title attribute is before they actually click the link, but maybe…
Posted on December 11, 2003 05:56 PM | #
7. Keith said:
Ben, yeah, I thought about that one as well. Almost did that, but then I decided that it would really be better to have the dates visible.
I tried to put myself in one of my user’s place. Say they hadn’t been to the site in a week or so, it would be useful to have the recent entries up top and attached to dates so that one could get a quick read on what they might have recently missed.
I’m not all that worried about real estate on the side bar of the home page. I mean the most important and highly used items are at the top and as you go down you get into what I like to call “extras”.
You might wonder why the monthy archives and search are so low down the page. I thought about moving them up but learned that almost no one ever uses them. Thus they’re “less important” placement.
Anyway I know it looks a bit more “clunky” with those dates, but I really think the majority of my users (which come about once a week) will benefit from them.
If I learn otherwise I’ll just change it and maybe go with what you suggest Ben. One of the beauties of the Web – you can always change it. Not that you should, but you could. ;)
Posted on December 11, 2003 06:10 PM | #
8. Mike said:
I had the same dilemma, a sidebar that seemed to go one f o r e v e r …
My solution (albiet an ugly hacked comination of css and javascript) is used elsewhere. Simply divide your sidebar into definable sections and have them switchable (as in on or off) using the CSS display function.
If mine wasn’t so convoluted I would also consider a cookie install for regular visitors (or at least a ‘remember my preferences’ button).
Posted on December 14, 2003 08:17 PM | #
9. Robert Castelo said:
I translate Web sites other designers have created into Japanese, which involves spending a lot of time looking at the site and working with the code they’ve writen, and I’ve learnt a lot of techniques and design solutions while working on other people’s sites.
One thing that always screams out at me when starting a new project is whether the client is a ‘born and bred’ Web Designer, or if they’ve come from the world of print. It’s not so much the technical details that give it away, it’s the mind set - the inability to deal with a medium that is going to adapt what is on the page depending on what browser/OS/screen/fonts the visitor has.
I suspect that Flash is the refuge of print designers on the Web.
Posted on December 16, 2003 05:25 PM | #
10. D. Leona said:
“I suspect that Flash is the refuge of print designers on the Web.” Robert - you are a genius!
Actually the Flash kids I know are kids - I doubt they ever saw antiques like Quark. But they do have a mindset that a page is good if that page, standing there all alone, looks good.
Somehow they think users will know how thick the book is and can turn pages so every single page can just live it’s flashy (often noisy) independent life.
And there’s the horrible problem of upper-level managemenet - the folks who are not really involved in the project - being impressed with trendy crap.
Some days, I think it ight be worthwhile to hire booth babes to explain usability decisions. I think the toughest balancing act is preparing status reports. How do you give your managers and clients enough information to keep them clear on the concept, without giving them an advanced case of MEGO?
Posted on December 17, 2003 08:33 AM | #
11. Robert Castelo said:
“Some days, I think it might be worthwhile to hire booth babes to explain usability decisions.”
…hmm, that might actualy work!
Posted on January 27, 2004 04:07 AM | #
Comments are now closed