Comments on: Problems with expanding navigation http://www.goodusability.co.uk/2008/12/expanding-navigation/ Wed, 28 Jul 2010 11:54:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: David Hamill http://www.goodusability.co.uk/2008/12/expanding-navigation/comment-page-1/#comment-927 David Hamill Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:04:59 +0000 http://www.goodusability.co.uk/?p=318#comment-927 It isn't so much different in appearance or concept Yves, but the difference is in how it works, not appears. It isn’t so much different in appearance or concept Yves, but the difference is in how it works, not appears.

]]> By: Yves http://www.goodusability.co.uk/2008/12/expanding-navigation/comment-page-1/#comment-924 Yves Thu, 12 Mar 2009 07:39:08 +0000 http://www.goodusability.co.uk/?p=318#comment-924 After all, that "immediate options" navigation isn't so much different from the "expanding" (tree) navigation. (I think tree is a good name for it, since many file explorers use that type of visualisation for directory hierarchies, along with those tree lines and plus/minus symbols to click on.) The immediate options menu just has some of the options of the tree menu left out, namely those that are cross-links. The second part of your post describes how links to child pages should be given more emphasis, which can generally also be done in a tree, IMO. It's just that trees can be unnecessarily longer. Anyway, good spot on the details that many miss... After all, that “immediate options” navigation isn’t so much different from the “expanding” (tree) navigation. (I think tree is a good name for it, since many file explorers use that type of visualisation for directory hierarchies, along with those tree lines and plus/minus symbols to click on.) The immediate options menu just has some of the options of the tree menu left out, namely those that are cross-links. The second part of your post describes how links to child pages should be given more emphasis, which can generally also be done in a tree, IMO. It’s just that trees can be unnecessarily longer.

Anyway, good spot on the details that many miss…

]]> By: Dmitry http://www.goodusability.co.uk/2008/12/expanding-navigation/comment-page-1/#comment-56 Dmitry Wed, 24 Dec 2008 17:50:25 +0000 http://www.goodusability.co.uk/?p=318#comment-56 Yeah, I definitely agree with you. Showing more and more options in the same list is a bad idea -- you're putting too much stuff on the same plate. New navigation options should be displayed separately so I can clearly see what's available, without the noise of the previous list. I think horizontal menus work well here as you can add another layer under the top level navigation to display the new set of links. Tabbed horizontal navigation is even better as you can "see" how the hierarchy works. Yeah, I definitely agree with you. Showing more and more options in the same list is a bad idea — you’re putting too much stuff on the same plate. New navigation options should be displayed separately so I can clearly see what’s available, without the noise of the previous list.

I think horizontal menus work well here as you can add another layer under the top level navigation to display the new set of links. Tabbed horizontal navigation is even better as you can “see” how the hierarchy works.

]]> By: Irene Demetri http://www.goodusability.co.uk/2008/12/expanding-navigation/comment-page-1/#comment-51 Irene Demetri Tue, 16 Dec 2008 08:10:53 +0000 http://www.goodusability.co.uk/?p=318#comment-51 I believe that chosing between one menu or the other depends on the number of links / items the menu has (as you said for menus that are a few levels deep). Not being very sure myself when that 'fine line' is crossed and the expanding menu is no longer user friendly. Your examples of BBC and Transport for London definitely work better with the 'immediate options menu' as they have a very large number of inner pages and links. Personally I haven't used such a menu but after reading your post I see how it works much better and I will for sure concider for future projects. Thank you I believe that chosing between one menu or the other depends on the number of links / items the menu has (as you said for menus that are a few levels deep).
Not being very sure myself when that ‘fine line’ is crossed and the expanding menu is no longer user friendly.
Your examples of BBC and Transport for London definitely work better with the ‘immediate options menu’ as they have a very large number of inner pages and links.
Personally I haven’t used such a menu but after reading your post I see how it works much better and I will for sure concider for future projects.
Thank you

]]> By: Stocks and Bonds » Blog Archive » Good Usability » Problems with Expanding Navigation http://www.goodusability.co.uk/2008/12/expanding-navigation/comment-page-1/#comment-50 Stocks and Bonds » Blog Archive » Good Usability » Problems with Expanding Navigation Tue, 16 Dec 2008 03:42:54 +0000 http://www.goodusability.co.uk/?p=318#comment-50 [...] Transport for London (TFL) also use the immediate options menu. Here’s a picture of it:. An example of the navigation menu provided on the Transport for London site. An example of the navigation menu provided on the Transport for London …[Continue Reading] [...] [...] Transport for London (TFL) also use the immediate options menu. Here’s a picture of it:. An example of the navigation menu provided on the Transport for London site. An example of the navigation menu provided on the Transport for London …[Continue Reading] [...]

]]>