Ok, on this page for example: http://www.indigenousdesigns.com/section/news/
You have these "Read whole article" links; I think you need to use some visual element (or even textual, or both) to let the user know that this is a PDF file.
Site Critique - ID
Moderator: General Moderators
- Ollie Saunders
- DevNet Master
- Posts: 3179
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: UK
Or better still, provide them in HTML.
- The Phoenix
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:12 pm
Nope. The steps to reproduce:ole wrote:I disagree. The only repetition is the bottom nav. Breadcrumbs and left are either showing something you can't ordinarily see or representing it in a different way both of which are important.You have four navigation paradigms going. Top right, left, bottom, and then breadcrumbs below the top right. Thats a huge repetition of information, and really confuses things.
Top nav, hover over company, see new text for "Our Story". Click Our Story. Now the same links are on the left as under the top. ("Our Story", etc). Bread crumbs also show the same path: Home, Company, Our story.
"Our story" (as navigation) is repeated four times in same page. Those links will count as 'internal links' (x4) and will reduce their score in some search engines.
- Ollie Saunders
- DevNet Master
- Posts: 3179
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: UK
Under certain circumstances they will appear to be repetitious but not always. The breadcrumb, for instance, is useful because it makes your position with the site's categories more obvious to you. Some surfers choose to use only one methods to navigate and find the rest distracting but just as many will rely on different methods being available to them. I don't think there is anything wrong with allowing multiple ways to reach the same point, in fact it is good. As the site expands in content the value in this will seem more obvious. The only reason I mentioned the links on the bottom as being bad is because they are going against a web convention the states that different, less important links go there.
- The Phoenix
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:12 pm
Everything in the top menu is repeated 100% of the time on the left, and usually on the bottom. The breadcrumb navigation, similarly, is 100% of the time repeated on the left. Always. At the least, lose the left or the top.ole wrote:Under certain circumstances they will appear to be repetitious but not always.
This I do agree with. However, it could be combined with the three others to make a single navigation method that shows the current position better. Even if not, there is a strong value to the breadcrumb staying, with the left and bottom removed.ole wrote:The breadcrumb, for instance, is useful because it makes your position with the site's categories more obvious to you.
On the contrary, they aren't different methods (with the above noted exception of the breadcrumb). That means simple repetition.ole wrote:Some surfers choose to use only one methods to navigate and find the rest distracting but just as many will rely on different methods being available to them.
There are three things wrong with it:ole wrote:I don't think there is anything wrong with allowing multiple ways to reach the same point, in fact it is good.
1. It means repeated use of links with the same text, going to the same place, on the same site. Search engines penalize for that, as it looks like a link farm.
2. It wastes space that could be used for content. Most users look first for content, and then later look for links - only to help them find the content they want. Over 20% of the page is being used for repeated navigation.
3. Causes confusion instead of consistency. Reusing the same navigation system reinforces the user to trust that navigation, which results in higher satisfaction for the user.
Again I disagree. With more content, it will become more cluttered, and more confusing to the user - while also pushing out even more content from their view.ole wrote:As the site expands in content the value in this will seem more obvious.
While not the only reason, that is a good reason also.ole wrote:The only reason I mentioned the links on the bottom as being bad is because they are going against a web convention the states that different, less important links go there.
- Ollie Saunders
- DevNet Master
- Posts: 3179
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 6:01 pm
- Location: UK