I agree with Mark Harris.
Mark Harris wrote:
libwebdev
wrote:
My organisation manages around 7000+ pages
for 100s of departments,
using a CMS. Mine is the only department outside the CMS, just because
we can.
We have been persuaded (read: bullied) to redesign our header to
exactly match that of the parent organisation. I have no problem with
that per se, but theirs includes breadcrumbs, and we don't want 'em.
Who pays your bills? Golden Rule is that the guy with the gold makes
the rules. Suck it up. "Because we can" is not a valid reason to do
anything. You are part of the organization, yes? Therefore you should
fit within its structures and strictures, whether you like that or not.
If they are wrong, document it and prove it, otherwise it sounds like
petulance to me.
I'm wondering what the consensus is here on
their usefulness. I've
always been under the impression that the purpose of breadcrumbs was
to indicate to the user where they had been. However, the ones we are
being urged to implement do no such thing; they simply display our
organisational structure. This means that on every one of our 200-odd
pages, the breadcrumbs will appear like so (we are the library):
Parent Org > Clinical Services > Library > Current page
The only thing that's going to change is the current page. To me,
that's not a breadcrumb trail at all.
Am I wrong in my thinking? Is this a common usage? How does this
benefit the user at all?
Yes it is useful to the user because:
- it gives them an easy way to get back to a senior hierarchical level
_without_ having to go back through the history. Or perhaps they hit
your page from Google (most likely) and haven't already been through
your hierarchy - they get a quick view of the authoritativeness of the
page and where it fits in your organizational structure;
- the users are used to seeing breadcrumbs and using them. Your
preferences should not impact their use - you're presenting information
for them to consume and so should design for their needs.
I'm questioning it because of usability
issues, which is how I tie it
in with web standards. If this is considered off-topic, I apologise,
and replies should come directly to me rather than the list.
Let's be honest, lib - you're questioning this because _you_ don't want
to do it and you're looking for something to wave at the people who
want you to do it that says "98% of web gurus agree with me so yah boo
sucks, we're not doing it". Don't cloak it with usability or web
standards.
Cheers
Mark Harris
Technology Research and consultancy Services Ltd
New Zealand
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
|
