Most importantly, what is the value to the end-user and how meaningful are these terminologies to ‘jo blow’.

Most importantly, what is the value to the end-user and how meaningful are these terminologies to ‘jo blow’.

If anything, I think it highlights that as technology and user experience approaches develop, we can’t really compartmentalise website navigation beyond the fundamentals.

We can frame information architecture into primary, secondary and tertiary information hierarchies – in most cases – but I’m not convinced this can be directly translated into the composition of a website’s navigation.

Meta and footer navigation are such fluid terms. We can’t capitalise on these in terms of a user experience by putting them into ‘boxes’. First, we need to figure out know how best to use them, which may be a bespoke solution for each and every website.

I think this is so apparent in the holistic layout conversation. It’s the same way that experts still can’t agree on the best execution of top level navigation, consistently forcing navigation composition into prescribed uniformity.

Some say ‘Must be left-hand nav… must be… that’s what our testing shows’, but we know that there is a richer conversation to be had to establish the best solution for the job.

Most importantly, what is the value to the end-user and how meaningful are these terminologies to ‘jo blow’.

I love how this post contrasts with Is it time to rethink website navigation (http://sixrevisions.com/user-interface/is-it-time-to-rethink-website-navigation/) – both from this website, both with so much merit, yet such different perspectives.

Thanks

Sandy