W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-eo-site@w3.org > February 2005

RE: please comment on prototype revisions [was Re: minutes Re: questions for discussion Re: ad-hoc WSTF discussion in 2 hours

From: Carol J. Smith <carol@kognitive.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 23:15:32 -0500
Message-ID: <41EF3CAF0000A56D@mta10.wss.scd.yahoo.com>
To: public-wai-eo-site@w3.org

Hi all - my comments are below.

Shawn said:
>Based on feedback from heuristic reviews, I made the following additional
>changes in the prototype (http://www.w3.org/2004/09/wai-nav/):
>* changed static navigation links to:
>	- WAI Translations
>	- Contacting WAI
>	- WAI Site Help
>	- WAI Site Map
>	- W3C Search
>specific question: WAI Site Help & WAI Site Map too similar? What about
>something like, "Help on WAI Site"

Yes I think they are too similar - though it doesn't help that visually
in the email they are listed on top of each other.  I know we've gone back
and forth on this, but I think it would be ok to remove WAI from all of
these names.  There could be confusion by users, but I don't think so. 
The most important one that we need to be specific about is the Search.

Looking at Search again I recommend we rename it: "Search W3C Sites".  That
way it is clear that it is not a search of only WAI or sites other than
WAI, but that since WAI is a W3C site, it is included in the search.

>* bumped "Guidelines & Techniques" up a level, so top level is now:
>	- Getting Started
>	- About WAI
>	- Guidelines & Techniques
>	- Supporting Resources
>	- WAI Groups
>to see previous IA, see http://www.w3.org/2004/09/wai-nav/sitemap.html
(which
>i will change tomorrow, Wed)
>
>specific question: can you remember any of the card sorting, usability
testing,
>or other work you did? if so, how do you think this change fits with your
>findings?

This makes a lot of sense.  I do not have any of my card sorting results
with me (all at my home office), but I do remember people grouping all of
the Guidelines and Techniques together.  Resources is still high up on the
list as well which is important.

How about just "Resources"?  I don't think the word "Supporting" helps the
description.  It seems redundant - resources by definition hopefully are
supportive.

Carol J. Smith
Accenture, User Experience Group
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 04:42:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:20 GMT