Logo. Two Rivers Consulting is Hagan Rivers and David Rivers, user interface design consultants located near Boston Massachusetts specializing in web application and enterprise application designtwo rivers flowing

follow us on

TwitterLinkedInDelicious
    writeto [at] tworivers.com or (978) 352-2585

Before/After: Table cleanup

Written by Hagan on December 7, 2009    Return to Blog Home

Periodically, David and I will show you some Before & After examples of redesigns that we’ve done. This isn’t client work – just a chance to flex our skills and rework a design. The screen shot for this Before/After is taken from a product made by SirsiDynix – they make software for libraries. In particular, our town’s library uses this software (feel free to test drive it). There are a lot of things I’d like to fix about the way this software works (and looks), but for this exercise I just wanted to tackle the table of search results. As a user of this software, I had a lot of trouble reading the information in this table.

BEFORE - SiriDynix's library search for "dog" (click for full size)

BEFORE - SiriDynix's library search for "dog" (click for full size)

Some of the things I wanted to fix in the table:

  • Many items do not have photos. And the big blank spot where the photo is supposed to go just ends up making the page look like swiss cheese.
  • The text with the title and publishing information just sort of falls across the page. It doesn’t seem to have much order to it. The fact that they’re all stacked on top of each other makes it hard to scan the titles, or even descriptions (to find video cassettes for example).
  • There are few “alignment” lines on the page. The images on the left (where there are any) create a column, and the buttons on the right create a column of sorts, but there’s really no other alignment.
  • Labels, like “Description” and “Media” are bold. Desktop applications used to bold labels, which I always found odd. I use bold to call attention to something, and I’m not sure what the label is worth calling attention to – the data would seem to be more interesting to the user.
  • There is blue text that isn’t a link (the description) – folks, just use blue text for links please.
  • The second item is a “video recording”, which is indicated by the icon next to “media”. But books aren’t really identified as “books” – there’s no media indicator for them. I’d like every type of thing in the list to get some sort of identification. Oddly, the last item in the list is also a video, but it isn’t marked with the same icon (and no it didn’t get clipped). It seems to be a bug in the data.
  • There seems to be a lot of wasted space.
  • I’m not a big fan of the aqua line between each entry. It’s heavy handed and adds to the clutter.

As I said, there’s plenty of other stuff on this screen I’d like to go after, but I’m going to exercise some restraint here. Here is the after screen, with a new table in place.

AFTER - SiriDynix's library search for "dog" (click for full size)

AFTER - SiriDynix's library search for "dog" (click for full size)

What did I do?

  • There’s a new initial column that is used to show the type of object – book, video cassette, etc.
  • Every object has a photo, even if it’s a placeholder “no image” photo
  • The title, publisher, and description information now appear in their own column. This improves scanning.
  • I’ve used dark gray to de-emphasize some information (such as publisher, publishing location, dimensions), leaving key information (such as publication date and number of pages) in black. One way to emphasize things is to make them bolder, bigger, more colorful. Another way is to de-emphasize the other things around them. But notice that I didn’t resort to making any of the text smaller than 12pt, because there are plenty of library patrons out there with reading glasses who don’t know how to make their browser zoom in.
  • Bold is used for the book’s main title, non-bold text is used for the subtitle.
  • I only use blue for links.
  • I stacked the controls on the right. If I were to do a visual redesign of the entire page, I’d style these buttons to match the new look. But for this work I left them as typical form elements.
  • Notice that we now fit all the same information in less space – there’s an extra 55 pixels below the last item in the redesign, meaning that for every 10 items we show we’ll save 110 pixels of screen real estate.

What do you think? Should I have done more? Did I overdo anything? What would you most like to change?

Share this with others:

  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Tumblr

Category: Before & After 1 comment »

One Response to “Before/After: Table cleanup”

  1. Justin Sinclair

    I like your version much better. But, I think it’s tough to redesign the table out of context. For example, your visual id for links is the colour blue. But, this isn’t necessarily clear. At first glance, I wasn’t sure whether “More Copies” was a link or a header for the button actions. My initial though was that the visual id for a link was bold text – like the item name or the top tabs. This would make it not a link. But then I noticed, bold is also used for form labels like “Sort by:” and the ever so helpful error message ” Warning: Unable to sort search results” – so my initial mental model breaks down.

    Also, some other questions I would ask:
    1) Are the numbers of the search result important? That is, for a given page does it matter whether you are looking at number 1 or 5, or 23 or 27? I think no. If that’s the case you could get rid of the numbers.
    2) Is the medium the most important piece of information? Perhaps, and that is what you’re suggesting by placing it top left. I was thinking, because it’s a repeated glyph (i.e you look at it once to decode and then only glance at it again) that it could be smaller and placed at the start of the item name. Kind of like a doctype icon in a file-system. But this is arguable.
    3) Are the three actions at the right of each search result equivalent? That is, are they all equally important? Also, are the outcomes of clicking them similar? Looking at the real site – “Add to my list” is a toggle which involves no page load. Whereas “Request item” takes you to another page (at least for users like me who aren’t logged in). If they invoke different sorts of responses, should they then be treated differently visually to hint at this?

    Anyway, I’ve gone on for far too long now, and am probably reading way too much into it :-) As I said at the top, I like your design much more than the original. It conveys more information in a smaller space and is easier to scan. So, much improved.


Add a Comment


CAPTCHA Image CAPTCHA Audio
Refresh Image