[thelist] Dropdowns - good or bad?

[aardvark]

> From: "Richard H. Morris" <richard.morris at web-designers.co.uk>
[...]
> > 'grok'. If users don't grok an interface paradigm, they won't use it
> > as effectively, and the communication/commercial aims won't be
> > realised to the same extent. That's the name of the game, surely?
> 
> Apparently not, according to your employers: the pwcglobal.com web site has
> *two* drop-down menus on the home page!!! Pot | Kettle | Black error?

you're assuming he has any control over that company's site... i 
would say he doesn't... look at the crap they auotmatically append 
to his posts, that's not a company that understands the medium... 
martin, OTOH, does understand the medium, and much better than 
his (new) employers...

> > Why do you think that Yahoo gets the traffic it does? It's
> > butt-ugly, but highly usable.
> 
> In a word: content. I actually find it a complete pain in the bum to get to
> anything useful on Yahoo! which is why I don't use it, preferring...

i only use it, and google, for searching only, so both are great for 
me... i've learned to tune out all the portal crap...

> > Likely estimation of how many will fail through poor usability?
> 
> Not half as many as through a failure to actually plan a revenue/business
> model. Sure, many will fail on usability issues but mainly in the B2C
> environment.

yes, but i think companies like boo.com are a perfect example of 
how shortsightedness on the UI end as well as the business end 
are both equally as dangerous... turn away customers and you turn 
away *all* sources of revenue...

> > Take a look at http://www.work24.co.uk/ - try and register. That will tell
> > you why it's failing. They're getting loads and loads of hits to the front
> > page, but almost no registrations (ie conversions to customers).
> 
> I find those sorts of delays with many back-end driven sites.

i actually have some familiarity with this site... trust me, the 
backend is the least broken thing on this site... the site as a whole 
is horribly lacking in any usability testing, or even browser testing... 
it's actually in the hall of shame over here when i train new folks...

> > Quite the opposite actually. I see sites maturing into greater
> > usability, or failing.
> 
> I fail to believe (in the B2B context especially) that we'll all be
> reverting to basic HTML-only sites like the institutional/research sites
> where content is king.

for B2B clients, i've found that content *is* king... anything that 
slows the transfer of information (everything from EDI to online 
sales tools) has proven to be costly...

> > Immature businesses moving online tend to go for whizzy,
> 
> Immature, like Ford, Jaguar, Audi, etc. ?

immature developers... that would be more accurate... those 
companies don't understand the medium, and as such are 
immature in that medium/market and hire developers who aren't 
seasoned...

> > He doesn't claim to be a visual designer. But take a look at his traffic
> > figures... Positive ROI? I think so.
> 
> In much the same way as the motivational speaker types generate business...

LOL... that's a good one... seriously, though, if he *didn't* make a 
site that is emminently accessible, we'd blast him... so instead it's 
got no eye candy...

> > If the client is providing a public service in the UK (also other
> > countries,
> > but the UK is the area I know best) then they're legally bound to be
> > accessible.
> 
> <genuine question> I'm not aware of that legal requirement: could you give
> details?

are you in the US?
Section 508 of the Workforce Investment Act, enacted on August 
7, 1998
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/508/508law.html

> Of our Clients doing both B2B and B2C business, their sites are indeed coded
> for accessibility.

accesskeys?  full alt attributes?  no image maps or frames?  
validated HTML and CSS?

> > I would also point out that there are 10m people in the UK with registered
> > disabilities. A reasonable market if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> Indeed, although that again depends upon your Client demographic. I wonder
> how many sites written by designers on this list are written to comply with
> Bobby's usability/accessibility in mind?

all mine... all martin's... there are a few others who are very 
particular about that... as well as the three levels of WAI 
compliance...

> How many sites with DHTML navigation menus pass?

um, none...

> > 3) you've done Usability Testing as part of your development programme?
> 
> No, because the Client has not requested that service - usually because of
> budgetary constraints. We don't run focus groups, usability testing
> workshops, etc. unless the Client is willing to pay for them.  But then our
> Client base does not want to spend many thousands on their sites either...

i think once you've got a handle on how to build accessible sites 
from the start, and experience doing them, building them that way 
is no extra cost to the client... no, you can't do full-bore testing 
with focus groups, but in our case, all of our sites are accessible 
unless the client requests otherwise... even those really low-budget 
ones...