Minutes of August 7, 2012 Meeting

Present:

A Au, Deodato, Just, Gardner, Gwizdka, Koruth, Ling, McDonald, Mills, Purger, Mullen, Lotts, Sterback, Anderson.

Excused:

Gwizdka, Lotts

Agenda

1. Finalizing the new design (Koruth)
2. Next phase project timeline (Purger)
3. First user comments on the Summer Refresh (Gardner)
4. Miscellaneous

1. Finalizing the new design

A. Koruth presents the most recent design revision submitted by Roger Black Studio (hereafter: RBS). The RBS revision was modified to reflect the most recent recommendations made by the Web Board's Information Architecture (hereafter: IA) team. These recommendations include a 3-part navigation system that was presented to the Libraries community in a Town Hall meeting in September 2011. Conceptual drawings for this system are available at http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/demo/2011_design_01/# and http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/demo/2011_design_01/infoArch_homepage.pdf A document containing a composite design that incorporated navigational treatments and content changes into the revision from RBS was discussed for the remainder of the meeting. This document is available at https://sakai.rutgers.edu/access/content/group/816f9194-ab96-4bf6-8397- 1b0c0b5792de/Visual%20Design/WB20120807_DesignDiscussion.pdf

B. Design feedback with action items:

Information Architecture

Navigation

i) A-nav terminology:

Purger brings up the question of whether "Find" is the right label for the tab in the A-nav (primary navigation). Discussion ensues about considering aligning with the rest of the terminology used in the A-nav.

Decision: Information Architecture team will review a variety of labels and make a final recommendation.

ii) Banner:

Mullen, Gardner mention that too much text in the banner section makes it seem too busy.

Decision:

• Remove the Rutgers home and Libraries home link. Bring up its necessity at the next WB-Libraries Open House. Explore option of keeping RBS version of home tab.
• Remove the site search
• Recommend login tab be removed and let users be presented with login at the point of access

iii) B-nav/C-nav

Mills suggests that placing search tabs in the C-nav might not be intuitive, since none of the labels on the C- nav indicated that this would be available. Discussion continues over whether AAL link should be provided on the B-nav or accommodated in the C-nav as a quick link.

Decision:

• WB recommends that site search box be integrated with the other search tabs and the link on B-nav be renamed to "Search" to be more obvious to users on what it contains.
• Question was raised on whether clicking on other items in the B-Nav should reveal the tab search.
• McDonald says that "My Account" cannot be delivered via the C-Nav due to technical hurdles.
• IA will recommend location of AAL link and the B-nav link labels.

iv) Breadcrumbs/back-paths

Question is raised as to whether breadcrumb trails need to be adopted and if so, to what depth.

Decision:

• WB recommends keeping breadcrumbs for pages that make sense in terms of keeping with context and structure.
• Hints to show the hierarchy of page
• IA will investigate and recommend solution

Content

v) AAL (Ask A Librarian) Block

Discussion about making live chat available via a slide in tab that is visible whenever chat is available. The tab would hang from the right edge of the webpage/document window.

Decision:

The AAL block needs to be above the fold. Its aspects needs consent from USC on aspects of prominence

• Chat tab idea was met with enthusiasm
• Explore anchoring chat box to bottom of the document window like zopim.com and other positioning as well
• Explore putting a picture of person on the tab
• Change text of tab to be "Chat Live with a Rutgers Librarian"

vi) "The place to go when you need to know!"

• Explore ways to insert the Library motto into the homepage

vii) Alert message

• Explore presentation of Alert message on home page in a manner that it stands out and calls attention to itself.

viii) Photos/Pictures/Images

• Lotts suggests that photos should feature more faces/people
• Mullen suggests more engaging and exciting, modern, science-related images, moving away from standard sepia-toned 'old' images.
• Purger says a process needs to be worked out wherein high quality photographs can be collected for use on the website.
• Koruth says that when pages are put together, care will be taken to ensure that there is a visual balance in the variety of images on the page to address issues raised above. Images should not dominate; rather work together to give a human and eclectic face to the libraries.

Design

ix) Overall design:

Gardner says that the design seemed text-heavy and "boxy" compared to the first design provided by RBS. Koruth responds that this "boxiness" can be addressed by taking content out of boxes and simply making lists of links with a title, for sections such as the AAL block and the "Information For" block. Also, current revision was a response to earlier comments about "boxiness".

x) Banner:

Since the banner projects the face of the libraries, it needs to be distinctive, open and serious. Koruth observes in that light, that the banner on the RBS revision has an "open and inviting" feel about it. (Unlike the more commonly seen Rutgers banners which usually have a block of color, this banner color combination is reversed. It has a white background on which sits the red seal), and is a step in the right direction. Melissa Just concurs that banner feels light & airy (praise)

Decision:

• The top red bar seems to put a "cap" on the page and "puts a lid" on it. A preference was mentioned for a gray color or to reduce the sharp contrast of the red bar.

2. Next phase project timeline

1. Purger calls on IA team to begin implementing changes to the design based on the days' discussion.
2. Purger asks help Team to begin working on information design for RUL Help.
3. Purger mentions that as part of RUL redesign, all satellite sites will be brought to the same platform.
4. Purger calls on governance document team to complete and deliver final draft of governance document.
5. Open House plans: WB will present the results of final redesign decisions.
6. Next steps include implementation of design changes, creating design templates for sub pages, host an Open House for RUL community, set up access management system for the website, train content managers, migrate/build content, and prepare for release (list of project activities included).
7. Gardner discusses possibility of usability study between the final approval of the design and its release. Decision is deferred.

3. Refresh Comments:

1. Gardner points out a common response -- the left bar is hard to read.
   Koruth says this has been addressed. The diagonal background has been lightened and the font size of the text has been increased.
2. Gardner points out several Searchlight complaints.
   Decision: Deodato reports that DIG is currently in the process of reconfiguring the product with the goal of improving performance. He notes that many subject categories currently contain irrelevant and/or inappropriate databases impacting the quality of results. Furthermore, the system has not been calibrated (via the assignment of database tiers) for optimal search speed and relevancy. Accordingly, DIG has invited selectors to review database assignments in their subject area(s) and submit any recommended changes via an online form. The deadline for submitting changes is August 8th. Only nine selectors have responded. DIG will assume responsibility for making configuration decisions for any remaining subject areas. DIG hopes to complete the reconfiguration by next week.
   Judging by the submissions and questions received thus far, it seems that many librarians may be unclear about the role and functionality of Searchlight (or federated search in general). Deodato proposes offering a "refresher" workshop to provide an overview of the product and respond to librarian concerns. The workshop will be held sometime in September after Deodato's return.
3. Remaining feedback was read aloud to WB. While searching using the new interface, users were happy to be able to find journals with ease. There have been several positive comments on the overall design of the refresh.
4. Au asks for a "Subject Begins with" search option. Katie Anderson asks if Advanced Search can be implemented into the tabs such that only Newark or Camden holdings can be revealed.
5. The Search Team will wait until students return to receive more user comments and does not plan to make any changes before the end of September.

4. Miscellaneous

Date for subsequent WB meetings to follow.

The meeting was concluded at 12:30 pm.