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 you look for
Subject:Re: if you had 60 seconds to evaluate a support web page, what would you look for From:Kathleen MacDowell <kathleen -dot- eamd -at- gmail -dot- com> To:Technical Writing Plus <doc-x -at- earthlink -dot- net> Date:Tue, 21 Dec 2010 20:26:01 -0600
People's take on John's questions are quite interesting to me, because I
couldn't really figure out what their purpose was.
IF you want to have people evaluate a site or article, it would be much
better to have them do tasks and ask them questions at the time than have
them answer a questionnaire. You can also just watch them and see how long
it takes them to find things, if they give up, etc.
I suspect that you've read Steve Krug's books; if not, I especially
recommend "Rocket Surgery." It should only take you a couple of hours to
read, and he's set up a framework that extremely easy to adapt and follow.
If you've already read it, maybe a brief review would give you some new
ideas. Believe it or not, he recommends only using 5 people at a time,
though he recommends frequent testing. (I found the number hard to swallow
at first, but evidently it's generally accepted)
Another valuable aspect of the book is his tips on giving feedback so you
get results.
I also agree with most of the general advice others have given.
Good luck no matter how you proceed.
Kathleen
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Technical Writing Plus <doc-x -at- earthlink -dot- net
> wrote:
> JOHN, Here is my detailed take on what you have written. Hope that it will
> help you.
>
> Comments inline below. My comments have to do, mainly, with the wording.
> The topics seem to be ok but then again I do not have experience in Web
> Usability.
>
> The general comments that people gave earlier seemed that they would have
> been of help, but I realize that this project is already near completion.
>
> Still, that 'basic' stuff that people were talking about just has to be 100
> percent perfect and good, otherwise people, volunteer people included, will
> become turned off, as Gene was saying. Jim Jones
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >Sent: Dec 21, 2010 11:53 AM
>
> >OK...odd question.
>
> Jim: Not so odd, methinks.
> >
> >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.
>
> Jim: Does public support mean for a government agency or does it simply
> mean on the behalf of a private company but the pages will eventually become
> open to the public (or to users of its product)?
> >
> >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:
>
>
> Jim: Basically, I'm looking for 'good' and that, as related to the Web,
> means that no time is wasted, things do exactly what you would expect of
> them, etc.
>
> As people were saying earlier too - human contact (the ability/choice to
> have that if necessary) and good navigation are critical, for each page.
> >
> >Content
> >Using the Concept/Task/Reference set of categories, does the article
> >contain mixed or is it clearly in a category
> >2 â Fits category
> >1 â Mixed Categories
> >0 â Doesnât match category
>
> Jim: What does 'Concept/Task/Reference' mean? Will this expression make
> sense to users? Here is my rewrite of this question:
>
> Does the article fit clearly into exactly one category, does it fit into a
> mix of categories, or does it just not match?
>
> >2 â Fits category
> >1 â Mixed Categories
> >0 â Doesnât match category
>
> >
> >Does the content match the title
> >Coming to an article because of the title, is the content what you
> expected
> >3 â Close Match
> >2 â Vague Match
> >1 â No Match
>
> Jim: I'd have 'Does the content match the title of the article [for all
> articles]?'
> >
> >Does the content seem easy to read, attractive, and make sense?
> >3 â Attractive and makes sense
> >2 â Makes sense but is not attractive
> >1 â Not what I would want my customer to see
> >0 â This seems to be a really horrible article
>
> Jim: I'd use 'relevant' and not 'attractive.'
> >
> >
> >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 â All graphics are clear and seem appropriate contextually
> >2 â Some graphics are unclear and need to be retaken
> >1 â All graphics are unclear and need to be retaken
> >0 â Article doesnât have graphics
>
> Jim: Does 'Are they clear' mean 'Do they communicate what you were
> expecting/what needs to be communicated?'
> >
> >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 â Some graphics are sized correctly
> >1 â All graphics need to be re sized
> >0 â Article doesnât have graphics
>
> Jim: Good, but I'd have it say 'Are all graphics the appropriate size?'
> >
> >Do they contribute to the understanding that words alone canât
> >If the graphics were removed, could the meaning be conveyed as well
> >through words
> >3 â All graphics are needed
> >2 â Some graphics can be eliminated
> >1 â No graphics are necessary
> >0 â Article doesnât have graphics
>
> Jim: I'd ask 'Are all of the graphics necessary -- does each graphic
> contribute to your understanding of content?
> >
> >Can they be substituted by keyboard characters
> >Are any graphics keyboard symbols that could be replaced by keyboard
> characters
> >3 â All the graphics could be replaced
> >2 â Some of the graphics can be replaced
> >1 â No graphics can be replaced
> >0 â Article doesnât have graphics
> >
>
> Jim: I'd ask 'Can any of the graphics be replaced by keyboard charaters?'
>
> >Links
> >Are all the links descriptive of what they are linking to (or do they
> >say something like âClick hereâ)
> > Correct:
> > See EKB article "Article Name"
> > Incorrect:
> > Click here
> >3 â All the links need to be redone
> >2 â Some of the links need to be redone
> >1 â No links need to be redone
> >0 â Article doesnât have links
>
> Jim: I'd have two separate questions here. Apparently it is ok to have
> both the descriptive wording and the click here type of link.
> >
> >
> >Meta tags
> > Description:
> > Keywords
>
> Jim: I do not know.
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> 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 kathleen -dot- eamd -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> or visit
>http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/kathleen.eamd%40gmail.com
>
>
> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
>http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
> Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
>http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat
>
>
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-
