Does the site have compelling content?

Is the site frequently updated?

Is the site out of date?

Is the information authoritative and accurate?

Is there an "under construction" or "sorry, page moved" signs?

Is there an attractive design?

Does it complement the content?

Is multimedia present?

Is it used effectively, or just as decoration?

How is space allocated?

How much space devoted to content vs. navigation?

How much "stuff" is on each page?

How does it look at 640x480, 800x600, 1280x1024?

Is the site structured efficiently?

How many levels are there?

How many clicks does it take to get to the good stuff?

Must you return to the home page to get to other sections?

Does the site offer good navigation?

Is navigation consistent throughout the site?

Is there a search offered? Is it accurate and precise?

Is there a site map? Do you find yourself returning to it often?

Does the site take advantage of hypertext?

How fast do the pages load?

How fast is the server?

How large are the pages?

How many small/large images?

Does the site use advanced technology effectively?

Are plug-ins required to view content?

Is there a "best viewed with…" sign?

Are there multiple versions offered?

Multiple browser options?

Multiple bandwidth options?

Is there contact or feedback information?

Is there a community place?

Does it offer useful information?

Is it easily used?

What is the purpose of the site? Does it fulfill its purpose?

-- examples: Yahoo!, NewsHub, imdb

The Web was born, now it is growing up, "finding itself."

There are no truisms or hard rules.

Don't follow these rules slavishly . . .

Sometimes the rules must be broken to set your site apart.

** What is compelling? No different than print or broadcast.

** If a reader visits the page two days in a row and the pages remain unchanged, they are not likely to come back a third time.

** there should be a visual indicator of the "last updated on…"

** If you come across a site that hasn't been updated in months, you'll never come back.

** Stoies are forever, online. Are there updates? Links back to related stories?

** How does one know what's authoritative?

** Has much to do with brand recognition.

** Silly errors, such as typos and grammar errors, are inexcusable, kill reader confidence.

** The important keywords here are professionalism and appropriateness.

** A site devoted to Hollywood better have a flashy design, but one providing legal information shouldn't.

** Nothing is worse than the inclusion of large audio or video downloads that don't contribute meaningful information. Again, the keyword is appropriateness. News stories can be enhanced with sound or video from the source.

** The most important thing should be first. Hit them over the head with it.

** The logo and menus shouldn't be the dominating thing on a page.

** Pages shouldn't be too long. If the navigation is effective, a site can be very successful by breaking things into small pieces. - - Too many small pieces can be a pain, if the person has to click a lot to get one story.

** There shouldn't be too many (more than one) concepts on a page.

** If focus groups and polls, users say they don’t like to scroll. As a result, many designers try to keep their web pages short. But one of the most significant findings of our observational research on web-site usability is that users are perfectly willing to scroll. However, they’ll only do it if the page gives them strong clues that scrolling will help them find what they’re looking for.

** Your choice:

-- lots of short, hyperlinked non-scrolling pages

-- fewer, longer, scrolling pages

** Usability research shows that fewer, longer pages may be best for users.

(Reference: http://world.std.com/~uieweb/)

** Shorter pages means more click$, faster downloads, all content visible.

** The design should fit comfortably into a 640x480 screen and should resize gracefully.

** Watch for sites where the navigation disappears if you shrink your screen. Esp. navigation on the right.

** If a horizontal scroll bar appears, that is a warning sign.

** Text shouldn't be too small in the large screen resolution.

** There shouldn't be too many colors, and colors should stick to a palette.

** Watch for colors that "flash" as you go from page to page.

** Watch for colored text, textured backgrounds, use of "saturated" colors, such as bright red or blue.

** Too large = slow, too many small graphics also = slow

** Graphics aren't really necessary. Many sites are getting away from too many.

** Watch for graphics that should be text.

** Even done well, frames can muck up the Web experience.

No visual cue of the URL

No bookmarking

** Too many design pitfalls: frames that don't scroll (but should). Frames that do scroll (but shouldn't). Too many frames, which produce a miserable patchwork effect (and a headache).

** All very very annoying and pointless.

Easy to use is the operative term here.

Make sure the underlying content is easy to get to from your home page

Navigation should be intuitive, shouldn't have to learn a "navigation analogy"

Readers come looking for information, but won't spend a lot of time looking for it.

** Just like a print magazine or book, a site should have its information organized intuitively, into departments or sections.

** Are there visual cues that help the reader see "where they are"?

Some user interface studies show that readers are unaware or don't care about the 'overall structure' of a site.

Nonetheless, if there is a confusing structure or none at all, navigation will be difficult.

* Filter pages are the ones that readers eed to USE to find what their looking for. They include the home page, highlights pages, a "what's new" page, section pages.

* Destination pages are the actual content, the articles, etc., what people came to the site for. Although content should be dominant on these pages, they still require navigation.

* Functional pages are home to forms, query boxes for searching, etc. Think of these as the interface pages to your software.

** The real content shouldn't be more than 2 or three clicks away from the home page.

** It may be better to organize your site into numerous, self-evident sections, each with fewer destination pages.

** Although every page should have a link to the home page, this shouldn't be the only way to get around the site.

** You should be able to jump from department to department from any page.

** Readers Don't Use the Back Button (and shouldn't have to)

** Menus, navigation bars, etc. should be in exactly the same place on each page.

** Although menus can change from section to section, they should be context-sensitive and consistent.

** The design shouldn't change drastically from section to section either.

** Try some searches. . .are there shouldn't be too many hits returned.

** There should be simple search and advanced search.

** There should be a way to limit searching to specific sections, dates, etc.

** There should be search help.

** Results should be relevancy-ranked.

** For readers who are lost, a complete conceptual picture of the site structure should be available. Think of it as a Table of Contents listing departments only…no highlights.

** If the sitemap is the only way to get around the site, then the rest of the navigation is failing.

** Outside of site navigation, in-text links can help readers navigate.

** Too many links can be distracting, making reading disjointed.

** Off-site links should be clearly marked, or pooled into a separate place. They shouldn't meld with site navigation.

** Many users turn it off! And your site is left navigation-less.

** Difficult to judge. Watch the "status" box on the bottom of your browser; watch the modem lights; use a diagnostic tool like NetMedic to see where network bottlenecks appear.

** Pages with complicated tables take longer to load.

** Height width tags make the layout appear early, making it easier to start reading.

** Interlaced and progressive images appear earlier.

** Is there useful information on the page right away? Something to read while the rest is loading?

** A long page of text can take a long time to load, and large images obviously take longer. You can actually save things to your local PC to see how big they are, monitor your browser status bar, or use a measurement tool

** Your browser can download several objects simultaneously, using multiple server connections. So, several small images adding up to a 20K total will download and appear faster than a single 20K image.

** However, too many small images means too many server connections can bog down the server, making pages load more slowly overall.

** It should be seamless, not cumbersome. Shouldn't slow down the page or obscure/overshadow the content.

** Sometimes behind the scenes, not even obvious to the reader.

** There are numerous problems with plug-ins, and they should only be required for ultra-compelling and unique content.

** You are forced to leave the site, download, install, sometimes restart, and then be expected to return.

** Many times plug-ins are lost when browsers are upgraded.

** Sometimes they introduce problems and incompatibilities.

** This is a warning sign: the pages may not look right in some browsers.

** Up to half of the sites readers will be alienated.

Multiple browser options?

Multiple bandwidth options?

** Although these things may be beneficial and courteous, they are an indication of inadequacies and may overburden production.

** Text-only sites are easy enough.

** This is an absolute necessity. There should be both, "how to contact the editors" for readers to comment on actual content, as well as "contact the webmaster" for questions/comments about the site itself.

** If the subject matter lends itself, this can make or break a site. Readers like to feel like they're part of something bigger, and like to "talk" to others with similar interests.

Does it offer useful information?

** A "sound off" or graffiti board can be fun, but not very meaningful.

** Moderated discussion boards and chats are more meaningful, but more time intensive.

Is it easily used?

** There are lots of kinds of software out there, and making it easy is paramount.

** Shouldn't require large applications or plug-ins that must be downloaded and installed.

** No site can be everything to everyone.

** Sites are always in progress. A newspaper or magazine shouldn't have to say "Please check us tomorrow for more"

** If something is incomplete or not ready, an "under construction" sign doesn't help. It demonstrates a lack of professionalism.

** If necessary, a "watch this space" or "coming soon" page can be a placeholder, but there shouldn't be partial information.

** Most of the Web is under construction most of the time. And if your site isn't, well, it's just sitting there getting stale. Spend less time on the cutesy construction warnings and update the page already.

** Demonstrates a lack of professionalism. The technology exists to reroute people, if pages really moved.

** These are inevitable, but too many indicates poor coding, again unprofessional. Also, the error messages should try to "help" people find what they're looking for.