You are at: Articles > Website design
What do readers want? |
x
Readers want websites to contain information that is:
I have tried to meet these requirements in this website.
By the way, most of the techniques I promote in this article are also useful for making printed text more effective — I've been using them for years in paper documents.
The time it takes a web page to appear depends on:
Designers have control over only the last point but they need to remember that many readers do not have a broadband connection. I doubt that I'm the only person who abandons a website if it's too slow.
For this website, I want to deliver information as quickly as possible. That's why there aren't many graphics. For internet delivery, I prefer to include graphics only if they contribute to conveying the message — for example, in the article on photography.
(If you've already seen the article on dog-sledding, you've probably noticed an inconsistency here — I've discussed it in Breaking the rules.)
I have become so frustrated with slow downloads due to irrelevant graphics that I have set my browser to ignore graphics. I suspect many other people do the same. This means designers should:
For one of my screens, the manufacturer recommends setting the screen area to 1024 x 768 pixels. If I do this, it's difficult to read the fixed-size text in the software, so I set the screen to 800 x 600. Yet many designers create pages that are wider than 800 pixels, forcing me to scroll horizontally — irritating, to say the least.
Websites have two types of visitors:
A site's navigation must help the second group to find their answers as quickly as possible.
In the web's early days, links were shown in bright blue text and were underlined. Now, each site seems to use a different convention for indicating links.
As a user, I like links to be clearly differentiated from other text, ideally using the same method throughout the site. I don't like the technique used on some sites where you have to move the cursor over text to find out if it's a link. However, underlining text seems an inelegant choice when other methods are available — it adds unnecessary clutter, spoils a page's visual appearance, and reduces readability.
In this site, all links are shown in dark blue, even those that are clearly in menus. A link's appearance changes slightly when the cursor moves over it, providing reassurance for the reader. This facility can also be used to display further information about what's behind the link.
When readers click a link, they want to get the information they are seeking — or at least to be nearer to it. It's very annoying, after waiting for a page to load, to find the information is no use. To prevent this, designers can:
For detailed-content pages, it helps readers if a page starts with a summary of the page's content — for example, the list of headings at the top of this page.
My definition of typography: the adjustment of the variables that control the readability of a piece of text. The following variables are important for making screen text easy to read:
For the last 500 years, typography has evolved to make text more readable. Until recently, we applied its principles to printed text only. However, because it's harder to read screen text than printed text, it's even more important to get the typography right for screen text.
My definition of page design: the arrangement of a page's components — such as headings, graphics, and blocks of text. Page design should provide pages that are:
As you've probably gathered by now, I think bullet lists are an excellent foundation for making pages attractive and efficient.
If several colours are used on a page, designers need to ensure the site is still usable by people who are colour blind.
To sum up, website pages should leave readers in no doubt that the designer has made every effort to make things easy for them.
Many people find reading from a screen difficult. Hence, it's essential that the writing style doesn't increase the workload for readers.
Readers need to transfer information effortlessly from screen to mind. Understanding and memorising new information requires plenty of work — readers certainly don't want extra work due to poor writing. But it often happens. The following failings hinder readers:
Are there fundamental differences between writing for print and screen? I don't think so. For writing style, anything that improves screen text will also improve printed text. Similarly, anything that weakens screen text will also weaken printed text. Technology might be changing how we deliver information but it isn't changing how people read.
The dog-sledding article contravenes the principles described here. Its format is typical of a magazine article, not a web page. Its main purpose is for leisure reading, not for conveying factual information efficiently.
I could have reformatted it for web use but that would have destroyed the article's entertainment angle. Which begs the question: is it appropriate to put reading material for entertainment on the web?
I don't think this type of material is appropriate for the web — I've included the article for a discussion point. Although I enjoy reading greatly, I usually find reading screen text to be unpleasant. So, until we have screens with higher resolutions and a wider use of good typography, I can't imagine using the web as a leisure activity. But I know that many people disagree.