Return to Summary Page

How can this web site be improved?

1. By offering more of an introductory explanation of the purpose of the site. 
2. It looks clunky at the moment, and the size of the text in the roll over menus seemed to change depending on what section I was in. Also the bottom item on the roll over menus blends in to the page. I'm not to keen on the fact there are 2nd level rollover menus either - I'd rather see these links elsewhere, e.g. on the L/H side or below the page heading. 
3. The design can be improved to support the navigation in a better way. 
4. For references referring to geographical locations, you may want to add a map or list of locations that allow the user to jump to the specific location. For example, the list of universities would be more usable if I did not have to scroll down and look at every location, but rather could simpy jump to the location suitable for me. 
5. Make the dhtml navigator work in Opera (it may not work in Netscape 6 either, but I didn't check) 
6. You have to add the professional forums. 
7. Use onClick for the menu pulldowns, not on Mouseover. Let *me* be in control of the menus, not you!!! 
8. Pop-up menus appear TOO QUICK,even when you just move the mouse over it there should be a delay, in my opinion 
9. Some of the external links are unsatisfactory 
10. There is a lack of introductory content, so as a first-time user I am not sure what is available. I only found the 'about' page after much exploration, and it is the key to understanding what is going on. Consider making this part of the first page. The graphic style looks as if it has been designed by an ergonomist - I can say that, because I am one. The large-type high-contrast look makes it seem to have been designed for the blind. Iterate! 
11.  
12. I've looked at the pages on this site on two browsers: Opera 5 and IE 5.5. There are a number of differences.In IE 5.5 I noticed that the top navigation topics are actually dynamic menus, these are very annoying, they get in the way of browsing and they offer no indication of whether you have clicked an item or not - which is Ok when the page loads quickly, but I found other pages were not so fast.My Opera browser does not produce these dynamic menus, and it is very easy to browse through - although again it could use an indication of what has been clicked on for longer-to-load pages. In fact we use a high-speed connection here at work (compared with my home connection) and I expect it would be more frustrating to use there (speculation, but usually a valid point)The home page looks strange on IE 5.5 - especially the hyperlinked bullet point: What's hot (current topic) which spans two lines, which are then not aligned to the same point at the left no matter what size the browser window is set to (very messy looking) This is due to my specifications for text font in IE (Georgia).Many of the pages are long (scrolling) and could use a return to top link so that the menu can be seen again. Or consider using text links at the base of the page as well.Am I just nitpicking? Or is it actually annoying? I think it may be. When reading through instructions: *this was when I read the top of this questionnaire page - it started by saying: 'If you have not yet used the site, please return to it by using your browser's BACK function, and use it further before answering this questionnaire.' Well, the browser has actually opened up a new window (this is the case for both of the browsers) and I can't use back. I see this kind of instruction on many web sites, including those I test, and it has a tendency to confuse users, especially the less confident ones. I realise this site is for people who are 'in the know', and we probably do not even need this depth of instruction; I was not flustered or stressed by the misdirection, as it was easy for me to spot it as a mistake. However, if instructions are to be given, I believe every effort should be made to ensure they are correct. It is my personal opinion - but, as an individual, I often judge sites on these smaller issues, due to the vast amount of information on the web for this and other subjects. When looking to decide which sites are worth book-marking, and which may not be, it can be these kinds of details which help you to decide how much attention has been spent on content. 
13.  
14. navigation, consistancy on terminology 
15. Navigation needs further improvment.supported by hard copies and introduction sheets (especially in other languages other than English). 
16. Better, more attractive design. A bit Old Fashion style. 
17. The design strongly needs a face lift. 
18. Provide a list of alphabetized references that includes all areas, in addition to offering many that are broken down by specific categories.  
19. A search engine on the home page.Main pulldown menues: The selected menu item has the same background fill as the main background. Also they cover parts of the information on the screen when pulled down 
20.  
21. less clicks in the resource section. foudn that bit the most useful in terms of info but the most painful in terms of navigation 
22. Search? 
23.  
24.  
25. Navigation and design! 
26.  
27.  
28.  
29.  
30. One section that seems a little light on content is Implementation (under Methods). I know I rely on several different types of deliverables (depending on the project) to specify the design. For example, I often create a UI Specification as a deliverable yet this artifact isn't covered. In addition, the discussion on rapid prototyping does not seem to relate to implementation (although it is a link in that section). In my experience, I do not like to rely on the result of rapid prototyping as an implementation spec since the prototype is usually not comprehensive enough. Does this discussion really belong in this section? 
31.  
32. With more methods and information 

Return to Summary Page