Elucian Islands (SLURL at Flickr page)

I do not expect every item in every one of Jakob Nielson’s articles to bear fruit; still, it is a bit of a surprise…the extent to which those same problems apply in VW design.

In an earlier post, I found that reviewing Nielson’s very first point scored a hit. A web design mistake described in ‘96 still has meaning when looking at virtual world design. Today, I returned again to that first “Mistakes” article. Among other points mentioned in the article, he advised against

• design bloat (gratuitous use of tech)
• moving or blinking text
• long download times
• orphan pages
• long scrolling pages

Each of these issues does have something to say about virtual content; so, they will be added to the list. They do not deal specifically with navigation or information display, so they may not be reviewed for a while.

One other nugget mentioned there is worth mining here:

Lack of Navigation Support

“Don’t assume that users know as much about your site as you do. They always have difficulty finding information, so they need support in the form of a strong sense of structure and place. Start your design with a good understanding of the structure of the information space and communicate this structure explicitly to the user. Provide a site map and let users know where they are and where they can go.”

— Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design (’96) by Jakob Nielsen

Developers working in SL may read this and say “Duh! That’s obvious.” But, many of them have come from the web design field where these issues are standard fare. Site maps are now common elements in web design. I even found a couple of site maps in world (images below). And, since I still have not seen a comprehensive list of design criteria I will add this to the list and press on…

Are you building out an entire region? Does the design occupy enough space to warrant a site map? What features can a site map employ? What is the best example of a site map you have seen?

Site map provided for visitors to Elucian Islands (SLURL)

Site map provided for visitors to Tata Indicom; (SLURL)

In the last post I presented a list of design issues collected from other sources. A broad range of concerns is addressed in that list, which helped when categorizing the various types of design elements. Each issue was reduced to the most basic interaction it described, and several common aspects emerged.

However, many of those issues represent aspects of design that are either complex or broad, such as user experience and overall quality. Those issues will require a degree of analysis that is beyond the initial reach of this project. After removing those complex issues, six categories of simple design issues remain.

Navigation-Content

This category pertains to the purpose of navigation aids. What assistance does a user require to ensure that the entire design is experienced? Do sufficient visual aids exist to ensure that they are exposed to the entire build, whether by moving their avatar or camera position? Are there any side trips or particular camera angles to notice? Are there different paths for different users?

Navigation-Distribution

This category pertains to the placement of navigation aids. Are there sufficient signs, pointers, and teleporters at the central landing zone? Are these aids present throughout the build, allowing users to easily move within the site? Is the particular location and placement (position and orientation relative to objects) of each individual aid optimal. Are there too many?

Navigation-Presentation

This category pertains to the appearance of navigation aids. Are these aids obvious? Do they have a consistent style (colors, shapes, iconography)? Does their design distinguish them from other objects and aids? Does their design provide sufficient contrast without being obtrusive or incompatible?

Information-Content

This category pertains to the purpose of informational displays. What descriptions are necessary to explain the elements within the actual build? What information is implied by—or, can be extrapolated from—the design, or from specific parts the design?

Information-Distribution

This category pertains to the placement of informational displays. Is the information pertinent to the immediate location within the build? (Don’t tell me about the lions at the landing zone. Perhaps just tell me that there are lions, and then show me how to get there.) Are these aids present throughout the build, informing users as they move around the site? Is the particular location and placement (position relative to objects) optimal for each individual aid. Are there too many of these displays? Could some information be better supplied via notecard or external source?

Information-Presentation

This category pertains to the appearance of informational displays. Are these design elements obvious? Is the text readable? Do the displays have a consistent style (colors, shapes, typography)? Does their design distinguish them from other objects and aids? Does each display occupy sufficient area without being obtrusive or out of proportion?

This list is not exhaustive, the design issues given here are examples. Still, these basic categories contain issues which are simple enough that analysis is more likely to generate results, and the list is small enough in number to simplify the content evaluation process.

For much of the day, I struggled to fill the gap left on removing the term “standard” from this process. It was one heady moment of confidence that saw me insert that word into the introduction. But then again, if this project does not deliver solutions, then I have produced nothing. I kept wondering: What is a solution that is not quite a standard. Then, during my evening constitutional, it occured to me…

Before a design principle becomes a standard, it is likely to exist as a convention.

Whew!

This project does not need to devise new strategies and then work for their adoption. It should simply identify solutions that are already in place, and recognize where repetition has proven their effectiveness. So, the process that is emerging looks like this:

1. Identify the stumbling blocks
2. Deduce sensible guidlines for each case
3. Search for instances where solutions already exist

Moving right along…

In an earlier post, I suggested the goal of developing a checklist for content creation. Two such lists have been discovered. One is short; but ample, given the context of its delivery (an interview). It is a list of design criteria offered by Markus Breuer in the blog post titled METAVERSE08 Usability in Second Life. The other list is provided by Eloise Pasteur in the form of three web documents (1, 2, 3). These criteria apply in the evaluation of learners’ projects; but, since the lesson was about building in SL, they provide a practical set of design issues.

A review of design and assessment criteria provided by these two sources has resulted in a classification scheme for design elements. I will post the categories here. Then, you will find the bulk of the issues raised by the two sources mentioned above, along with designated categories.

Categories of design elements

• Nc = Navigation (Content) – addresses the purpose of navigational aids
• Nd = Navigation (Distribution) – addresses the placement of navigational aids
• Np = Navigation (Presentation) – addresses the appearance of navigational aids
• Ic = Information (Content) – addresses the purpose of instructional text
• Id = Information (Distribution) – addresses the placement of instructional text
• Ip = Information (Presentation) – addresses the appearance of instructional text
• B* = Design of Buildings – addresses the need to consider interiors, tight spaces, thematic continuity and distinction
• Q* = Quality of design – addresses the overall quality of the content

User-dependent Issues

• UI* = User Interface – addresses the need to adjust viewer settings, preferences
• UE* = User Experience – addresses the level of expertise required

* These categories represent design issues that may fall beyond the scope of this study. They are included here due to their appearance in the original source materials.

Design Issues [category]

• Make signs readable from the point where people arrive when teleporting [Ip]
• If your cool architecture makes it had for avatars to navigate: offer them help. [Nd]
• Design for avatars that have a cam 2m behind and 1m above them. [B]
• Don’t lead people into dead ends or hide access points. [B]
• Help people find orientation [Ip]
• Help people get their processes straight: what can I do? [Ic]
• Bot that give cryptic instructions are not helpful [Misc.]
• Tell users exactly what you need them to do [Ic]
• Price tags and orientation maps are cool, too [Ic]

This list was suggested by Markus Breuer (link above). The following list was compiled from the rubrics offered by Eloise Pasteur (links above).

• Is it clear where the avatar is supposed to go on arrival? [Nd,Id,Ip,Ic]
• Is the theme of the build made clear immediately on arrival? [Ip]
• Is it clear for whom the build is intended? [Ic]
• Is there a stated list of objectives? [Ic]

• Is it clear which path the avatar should take or the options that are available? [Nc]
• Are avatars encouraged to change environment settings to make the most of the build? [UI]
• Is navigation within the build obvious? [Np]
• Is it easy to find the start again if appropriate? [Nd,Np]
• Is it easy to get between different parts of a build, e.g. via teleports? [Nd,Nc]
• Can avatars exercise choice in navigation? [Nc]
• Are the different parts of the build adequately distinguished? [B]
• Does the build cater satisfactorily for different avatar sizes? [B]
• Does the build cater for social use, e.g. by pairs or groups of avatars? [B]
• Is the build camera-friendly, i.e. the avatar camera stays within walls and isn’t subject to “bounce” and newbies aren’t forced to use complex camera movements? [B]
• Is the build interactive? [Q]
• Is interactivity related to the topic? [Q]
• Is interactivity varied? [Q]
• Does the build exploit the potential to provide an alternative to real-life experiences? [Q]
• Does the build make use of the third, z dimension? [Q]
• Is the build “kinetic”, i.e. does it encourage movement and navigation? [Q]
• Do the structural elements used have relevance to the topic? [Q]
• Is there sufficient variety to the build? [Q]
• How accurate and topical is the information provided? [Ic]
• Are there any accidental examples of cognitive dissonance, e.g. fluids appearing to flow uphill. [Q]
• Is there use of humour where appropriate? [Q]

• Avatar skills: Can the objectives be mastered with students having their current level of avatar SL skills, or is there time and significant justification to spend time to develop said skills? [UE]
• Attention: How easy or difficult is it for you to stay focused in this environment? To the material being presented? Is something creating distraction or intellectual “noise?” [Q]
• Comprehension: Are the messages, visual or linguistic, comprehensible? Is the vocabulary too complex to follow? Do the communication forms (IM, chat, and voice) adequately facilitate needed communication? Is it clear how the visuals relate to the subject and do they help to understand it? [Q]

Each one of these issues may be addressed later, or it may not; and, any one may lead to a specific guideline (as part of the “process” mentioned earlier). All of this is now open for discussion, too.

How do we evaluate usable spaces?

In the first post in this series, I shared the basic hunch driving this project by asking the question:

Can VW design be informed by the study of usability in early web page design?

In this post, I will test that premise by jumping into an early article by Jakob Nielson, then finding and dissecting a web page issue. I hope to get at the heart of effective design, potentially putting my pointer on a pulsating principle of effective communication.

Mr. Nielson is “a leading web usability consultant” who holds 79 patents in the United States, primarily for making the Internet easier to use (Wikipedia). His site appears to be focused on corporate web design (tag line: usable information technology); but, corporate web pages need to communicate, so what was learned there should also apply in the design of educational content.

And so, in I go…

As his first point in the seminal Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design (1996), Nielson chose to advise against using frames in a website. But wait, we’re talking about Second Life®, and we don’t got no stinkin’ frames.

Or do we?

Reading that first point in the article, one learns that the problem was how frames “break the fundamental user model of the web page.”

“All of a sudden, you cannot bookmark the current page and return to it.”

Sound familiar?

This is a navigation issue, and it does speak to one aspect of design in our virtual world.

About Land window in Second Life®

Breaking the user model with frames is the result of disregarding the user’s prerogative to control access. In Second Life, I can uncheck a checkbox in the About Land window and prevent you from creating a Landmark (see image). A landmark for a SL location is the virtual world equivalent to a bookmark. It is even a drop-down menu, just like in my browser. If I want to return to a location later, what do I do? Select Menu > World > Create Landmark Here. I can also assign a landing point for teleporting into the sim. This is another way to affect navigation. So, in a remote sense, SL has given us frames with which to work.

But, we can generalize this navigation issue further; and, this is where I find paydirt…

The usability exception for Nielson was that frames break the user model…you cannot bookmark the current page. More basically, this is saying that we should consider the users and provide them with an appropriate level of navigational control. That could be important; something to think about during planning.

Consider the following scenario…

You are strolling through my virtual zoo. You come to the Lion’s Den, and notice that the lion is so well crafted and realistic that you want to send a landmark to everyone in your contact list. So, you pull down “Menu > World > Create Landmark Here” only to learn that I have disabled this option. Why would I do that? Perhaps the lion’s den is the final step in a sequence, a scavenger hunt or a puzzle to be solved. Maybe the lion’s den is the pièce de résistance, and seeing that first would spoil a visitor for the rest of the tour.

Maybe I just want you to rezz near the Gift Shop.

The point is this: depending on the context of the build, you may—or may not—want to restrict a user’s ability to create a landmark.

What if I do not restrict teleporting to a landing point in my zoo? A user might rezz in the Lion’s Den where he will become dinner (and immediately end up at his home location, bloody and confused, because I have scripted my lion with a PounceOnDetect function and buiilt my zoo in a combat sim).

Now, with this navigation-control issue stirred up, other usability questions arise:

• What criteria lead one to see landmark or teleport restriction as an effective design strategy?
• Should a user be informed about the restriction, and how?
• Should an alternative be explained? (”To return to this location, enter at the Landing Zone and look for the Lions Den teleporter at the landing zone.” Or, more simply, reinforce the meaning of the link at the landing zone by repeating the graphic icon at the lion’s den display.)

I am optimistic that comparison with the Internet can inform the analysis of usability in virtual worlds; the purpose of this exercise was not to elaborate on land access. By considering a single design issue that was first raised thirteen years ago, I have identified another aspect of virtual world design that affects a learner’s experience.

Still, I do think I will open the wiki and add that point above.

Many aspects of a user’s experience with software can be examined for usability. User interface (UI), accommodation for those with physical challenges or differing abilities, suitability of a technology to the audience…all of these are usability issues. However, they are not the focus here.

The purpose of this project is to explore a variety of virtual world spaces in Second Life®, to experience the effectiveness or utility of each design; and then, to identify the characteristics that shaped that result.

Anyone is welcome to participate; invitations are being made via the SLED listserv, a RezEd forum thread, and numerous emails to individuals. I have begun to organize some information at the SimTeach wiki; but, am also weighing the options of building at Wikispaces, or even by starting a Google Group. I would be interested to learn of your perspective regarding these sites, or others.

Usability gauges the degree to which an object is

• More efficient to use—it takes less time to accomplish a particular task
• Easier to learn—operation can be learned by observing the object
• More satisfying to use

(from Wikipedia )

Particular aspects of the user’s experience interest me. I aim to identify those characteristics of virtual world design that make for effective communication; or, find examples where the message gets fuzzy…then try to imagine alternatives.

I do not plan to evaluate entire builds.

I am not in this to throw stones. Rather, I will be observing discrete elements like instructional text displays, navigation elements, and media interfaces; any object a user engages to consume the content. I will be looking at the color of a sign, the shape of a prim, and the placement of objects in relation to one another. But, where my view of features is narrowed, my reference to the history of web design will be generalized. When reviewing the history of web design I will seek out the underlying principle of effective communication by looking past the device of any particular element (see references to Nielson, first post).

On review, my use of the term “standards” may be ambitious. Will any single principle apply in every case? Can a group of educators and designers agree on a set of criteria, enough to benefit a significant number of users? What can come from discussion about usability?

What I am imagining is a list of design criteria; a content creation checklist. But, since my ideas just scratch the surface, I will continue to contact folks who might have 2¢ to add.

You are already reading this…who have I left out?

In the first post in this category, I described how I have begun to study the history of web design as a means to approach instructional design in virtual worlds. An hour and a half with Google, and I have enough material on web design, instructional design theory, and distance learning to keep me thinking about usability for weeks.

But first, before diving in to all of that, I will describe two examples of communication in virtual world design; one is very effective, and the other leaves me scratching my head. And, as it happens, they represent two types of design element which may have the most obvious need to communicate; navigation and the presentation of information.

The Particle Laboratory

Few instances of instructional design in Second Life® meet the standards set by The Ivory Tower of Primitives. However, at The Particle Laboratory, Jopsy Pendragon may actually push the bar. Particle effects are produced with scripts. So, it is scripting that Jopsy is teaching us; and he does it well. If you have never been to The Lab…please, log in and go there now. You do not have to be interested in scripting to enjoy the visit.

Balloon-avator at Teal, Image by Torley

But, it is not The Lab itself that serves to make a point here. On arrival, you will find a balloon that can take you where you want to go; and, there are quite a few destinations in Teal that are worth the trip, other than The Lab. I have stumbled over this balloon ride more than once. And, I must not be the only clumsy avatar around, as Mr. Pendragon has recently installed a new navigational element…

Sit-target teleporter

Jopsy’s new option for reaching The Lab is a good example of an obvious and unambiguous navigation element. The first time I saw it, what struck me was not its size (it is huge) or how noticeable it is (bright red with a particle beam). What impressed me was how thoroughly it solved a problem and improved the user-experience. For me, there was no mistake about the purpose of this object. A first-time visitor might not understand its use immediately, much less appreciate the utility; but then, the object also has floating text, just in case.

I am sure that I will still opt for the balloon ride, but this approach to navigation has taught me plenty.

RMB City

Image by Daniel Voyager

Top-shelf design. Slide your draw distance up a notch, because there is a lot to see.

At RMB City 1 (SLURL), the People’s Palace offers information about the project. However, the amount of information is most significant when one considers the effort required to read it.

Info displayed on rotating prims

Large cones inside the palace have text assigned to their surfaces. These objects are rotating, presenting a challenge to any user who tries to read their message. I have returned several times now. So far, I am unable to find a way to stop the rotation, and am unwilling to continue adjusting my camera long enough to read any one display.

It looks like useful information; but the display is a moving target.

What are the lessons here? Do they only apply in these situations, with these particular circumstances? Or, can the nature of these experiences be generalized into principles that have value?

Delivery of information requires a design be evaluated for user experience. Is the presentation clear? Is it apparent that an opportunity to receive information is even present? Does the user have to jump through a hoop or walk a high-wire to reach success?

Navigation elements should be obvious. They should stand out as being interactive objects, inviting users to touch and teleport. They should be clearly labeled, explaining (somehow) exactly where they lead.

Many hands make light work.

My study of virtual world usability has a goal of identifying the principles of effective design for myself. The reason for sharing what I find is selfish. If I can stir up a conversation about design in virtual worlds, I can learn more, and probably learn it more quickly. Hopefully, these examples demonstrate two extremes in the effectiveness of communication. What have you seen in world? What examples of navigation strike you as both effective and unique (so not as well-known)? What examples of informational displays stand out in your mind as particularly user-friendly?

Remember these diagrams?

Have you ever teleported to a Second Life® location just to spend a lot of time trying to figure out where to go next, what you are supposed to do, or where you should point the camera? Suppose you arrive at a location and know you are in the right place. How long are you willing to look, to find what you were after? Five minutes? Ten?

How often have you teleported away before finding it, or left thinking you probably missed something you were supposed to see? Such experiences indicate a challenge for instructional design.

And, we’ve seen these problems before. Just “open in browser” to jump back into the proving ground.

“The only certain trend on the Internet and WWW is that there are no trends on the Internet.”
Jakob Nielson, in 1995

Sound familiar? The first decade of the Internet saw many lessons emerge from web page design:

• Hyperlinks should be grouped, but not at the bottom of the page
• one style of text does not work everywhere, but some font/style choices are even worse than a page full of monospace
• and, a variety of visual content is appealing, but clutter does not communicate

If unfamiliar with the study of web design, one look through Nielson’s Alertbox posts and it becomes clear that there was much to consider when designing for the Internet. On the growing web, lesser designs were tolerated as new sites employed fresh options; and we selected the best designs, mouse-click by mouse-click.

Now we have Web 3-D.

Cafe 101 (SLURL) – An inviting space with resources for educators

How do we evaluate usable spaces?

What are the design trends in the metaverse? If a pattern exists in labeling content like streaming media, I cannot think of it. If a trend has emerged for the design of navigation cues, I have not seen it. What types of content require rapid recognition or consumption? What examples demonstrate the most effective designs?

Is it new to consider virtual world design as quite similar to designing for the web? (It is to me.) To see the parallel, just work your way up from the earliest posts by Nielson. One article, Top Ten Mistakes in Web Design (1996), was later reprised in ‘99, ‘02, ‘03, and ‘05. Open any one and you might find yourself recalling a particularly wonky experience in world. Can VW design be informed by the study of usability in early web page design? In the next few posts, I plan to investigate further.

You are welcome to join the fray.

What could be better than having a scripting lesson come out of the blue?

While rooting around for information to support an upcoming post, I came upon a video from 2006. In that video, an avatar is seen touching an object and that object then becomes attached to the hand after the user makes a selection in a dialog box.

Did you know that an object can be attached to an avatar without the step of taking it into Inventory? I did not. I even have a use for this in a current project!llAttachToAvatar lets you attach an object directly to an avatar. The function’s entry at the LSL Wiki even has this very action as the demo script.

What I don’t know about LSL could fill a wiki.

I have learned to be optimistic about classes, lectures and seminars; or when approaching anything from tutorials to conferences. I am absolutely optimistic, and it is an “all or nothing” evaluation: If I learn one new thing then the time invested has paid off.

Sure, that is a low bar to jump over; but I said I was being optimistic, not enthusiastic.

Nasus Dumart with guest lecturer, Hiro Pendragon
(image by nasus.dumart)

Hiro Pendragon appeared at Molaskey’s Pub as guest lecturer last night, and he did not let me down. Actually, I learned several helpful bits. According to Hiro:

• educators always pay
• in Second Life “the user is part of a story” (and, in fact, his company “focuses on the storytelling element to drive the whole design”)
• much of their success is due to the fact that they invest “a *LOT* of time researching the technology”

But, the single most striking lesson for me came by way of demonstration…

Recently, I have spent many hours revising the design of an object, the iDP-Voyager, to create a more useful interactive display panel than its predecessor. The project has become one of passion: More features due to changes in LSL since the original version, enhanced usability given a greater understanding of the platform and the users, user-friendly due to a hard-won intention to market objects, and well-documented (of course). This object deletes content to ready itself for your next set or presentation; it speeds up, slows down, even hangs around ’til you’re gone and deletes itself; it slices, it dices…

Crap’s key (image by isfullofcrap)

And then, I am sitting there at Molaskey’s Pub, watching the chat roll by, wondering how Crap winds that key sticking out his back…and Mr. Pendragon rezzes a plywood cube, re-sizes it to an appropriate aspect ratio for images (”This was my first creation in SL…”)…and begins to illustrate his presentation by dragging images from Inventory onto that plywood prim.

No buttons or menus; no dialog boxes or listeners, no lengthy instructional notecard with highly verbose directions including a URL for a wiki support page or email needed. Just sort your pics in a folder, then drag each image onto a prim.

He turned a plain ol’ box into an effective multimedia tool.

It is said that the great ones make it look easy. Well, that was great.

Basic scripted objects

Running checkbox in script-edit view

I have begun to develop a series of scripts to introduce various effects to new users. These scripts can be placed in a default prim which becomes an interactive, instructional object. They are a series in that each script (or possibly group of scripts) will build upon what was presented in the previous script (or group of scripts).

I had worked on a similar project back in my first year as an avatar.

A major priority back then was to create an extremely low-prim object. This resulted in objects that might have the user toggling the “Running” checkbox (see image) in the script-edit panel to advance the lessons; or, any one object might have multiple scripts… or rezz other objects for demonstration. The scripting and comments needed to manage those behaviours sat right next to bits that were the meat of the lesson; and, the comments in those scripts were often instructing the user to look at one script first and then another, or toggle checkboxes to activate a script. It just became too clunky.

This new approach places scripts in separate objects. Each script can now be written with clear instructional content (read: extensive commenting), without the distraction and clutter found in the previous project.

On reflection, my own drive to develop low-prim objects in SL might have been unnecessary or extreme, restricting the design in an artificial way; but, it took OpenSim’s abundant elbow room to bring me back to a project that probably has value.