TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
RE: if you had 60 seconds to evaluate a support web page, what would youlook for
Subject:RE: if you had 60 seconds to evaluate a support web page, what would youlook for From:"Pinkham, Jim" <Jim -dot- Pinkham -at- voith -dot- com> To:"John Posada" <jposada99 -at- gmail -dot- com>, "List, Techwriter" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:10:49 -0600
Hmm..it might be partly graphics, but a bigger picture question is nagivation: Can users find what they need or clear signposts and links to what they need on the page in a matter of seconds? The web analytics folks could give you a real value, but ballpark, it's probably 7 seconds or less before frustration starts to mount. Assuming this is need-to-know info, perhaps/probably users will stick with you. But in most other cases, poorly organized web pages would get ditched very rapidly. The search button should also be clear, stand out, and reside near the top of the page.
-----Original Message-----
From: techwr-l-bounces+jim -dot- pinkham=voith -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+jim -dot- pinkham=voith -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of John Posada
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 11:53 AM
To: List, Techwriter
Subject: if you had 60 seconds to evaluate a support web page, what would youlook for
OK...odd question.
I have about 1100+ public support web pages where I need to do an objective evaluation of subjective criteria. This evaluation will be done by a few "volunteers" over the next few days.
I need some ideas on what you might look for. BTW...I'm submitting my recommendations at 5pm today, but no rush :-) As a start, to give the question perspective, here's what I'm thinking so far:
Content
Using the Concept/Task/Reference set of categories, does the article contain mixed or is it clearly in a category
2 - Fits category
1 - Mixed Categories
0 - Doesn't match category
Does the content match the title
Coming to an article because of the title, is the content what you expected
3 - Close Match
2 - Vague Match
1 - No Match
Does the content seem easy to read, attractive, and make sense?
3 - Attractive and makes sense
2 - Makes sense but is not attractive
1 - Not what I would want my customer to see 0 - This seems to be a really horrible article
Graphics
Are they clear. If you were a Customer, would the graphic appear clear, both visually and you understand what you are looking for
3 - All graphics are clear and seem appropriate contextually
2 - Some graphics are unclear and need to be retaken
1 - All graphics are unclear and need to be retaken
0 - Article doesn't have graphics
Are they sized appropriately
When viewed, does the graphic appear sized correctly, or does it shift text incorrectly or cause an increase to size of bottom scroll bar
3- All graphics are sized correctly
2 - Some graphics are sized correctly
1 - All graphics need to be re sized
0 - Article doesn't have graphics
Do they contribute to the understanding that words alone can't
If the graphics were removed, could the meaning be conveyed as well through words
3 - All graphics are needed
2 - Some graphics can be eliminated
1 - No graphics are necessary
0 - Article doesn't have graphics
Can they be substituted by keyboard characters Are any graphics keyboard symbols that could be replaced by keyboard characters
3 - All the graphics could be replaced
2 - Some of the graphics can be replaced
1 - No graphics can be replaced
0 - Article doesn't have graphics
Links
Are all the links descriptive of what they are linking to (or do they say something like "Click here")
Correct:
See EKB article "Article Name"
Incorrect:
Click here
3 - All the links need to be redone
2 - Some of the links need to be redone
1 - No links need to be redone
0 - Article doesn't have links
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as Jim -dot- Pinkham -at- voith -dot- com -dot-
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
