français

Return to component reviews index

Creator: Ivan Chan (@ivan4)

The following list represents a quick and brief heuristics’ evaluation of one(1) individual Web Experience Toolkit (WET) component. The purpose of this evaluation is to provide immediate usability feedback, proper implementation and developmental guidance for the component.

For the evaluation, a separate review must be conducted for each component, and that in some instances, multiple reviews of the same component will be conducted by several evaluators. Since WET components, its usage and implementations vary considerably in different environments and scenarios, some of the heuristics below may not apply to specific components.

1. Visibility and Sensory Feedback of Component Status

1. Does the component always keep users informed about what is going on, with obvious and immediate sensory feedback? (e.g. moving sliders, button-over states, haptic feedback)
2. Does it provide visual cues for easy task processing? (e.g. using text, colour, size, shape, location to draw attention)
3. Does the layout establish and communicate situational relationships? (e.g. status changes, alerts)

2. Match between Component and the Real World

1. Does the overall presentation of information correspond to common expectations and real-world conventions?
2. Do the various elements function as one would expect?
3. If shape or form is used as a visual cue, does it match cultural conventions and associations? (e.g. triangle = play button, yellow triangle = caution)
4. If colour is used, do the colours correspond to common expectations about color codes and relational values reflected in the real-world? (e.g. red = alert)
5. Do text styles and fonts conform to existing industry applications and usage? (e.g. bold text = important)

3. User Control and Freedom

1. Do users have the liberty to make clear choices from the information provided?
2. Do users have the ability to cancel, ‘back out’ or undo an action?
3. Do users have control to freely select items in a timely fashion? (e.g. clicking on buttons anytime, tabbing entry fields)

4. Consistency, Standards and Naming Conventions

1. Have industry and/or WET formatting standards been followed consistently in all applications? (e.g. the WET “Correct Use” method)
2. Does the WET component use other lateral WET approved components like icons, buttons, text, colours, borders, etc. in a consistent manner?
3. Is information appropriately grouped together using common themes?
4. Is plain language correctly represented in context so that it resonates with the intended target audience?
5. Do character identifiers/labelling avoid "naming collisions" that might occur when similar but different words are placed in close proximity?
6. Is the first word of each item the most important – being simple, brief, functional and descriptive enough – to facilitate user decision-making and task processing in a consistent manner?

5. Error Prevention and Recovery

1. Does the component prevent users from making errors whenever possible? (e.g. typeahead)
2. Does it warn users if they are about to make a potentially serious error?
3. Are prompts and error messages brief, unambiguous, grammatically correct and explained in plain language?
4. Does the component precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution?

6. Visible Recognition Rather Than Memory Recall

1. Are instructions, objects, actions and options visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate?
2. Is there a common expectation for the placement of graphic elements, text, prompts and cues where the eye is likely to be looking on the component?
3. Have items been grouped into logical zones using proximity, spaces, lines, colours, fonts and/or headings for improved recognition?
4. Is common colour coding and highlighting consistently and appropriately used to improve recognition as expected?
5. Does the component immediately facilitate a common identification and understanding of its purpose and function against real-world conventions?

7. Flexibility and Efficiency of Use

1. Does the component provide or allow for accelerators? (e.g. such as keyboard shortcuts for high-frequency commands)
2. Are alternative operational options provided and visually displayed for user selection? (e.g. providing choices for the user)
3. Does the component use the fewest number of effective steps to shorten the amount of time for user understanding and tasking?
4. Are appropriate data or information grouped in meaningful ways to decrease search time?

8. Aesthetics and Minimalist Design

1. Is there only, and all, the essential information for decision-making displayed on the component?
2. Has excessive detail in component design and layout been avoided while removing extraneous, unnecessary and competing information?
3. Is the visual layout and graphic elements presented naturally and intuitively in a logical and common fashion? (e.g. good design layout)
4. Are meaningful groups of items separated by adequate white space so that it creates symmetry while leading the eye in the appropriate direction?

9. Help and Documentation

1. Is the information relevant, current, accurate, complete, to the point and in plain language?
2. Navigation: Is information easy to find?
3. Does the information being presented focus on and follow the sequence of user actions? (e.g. giving users what they ask for)

10. Skills

1. Does the component support, extend, supplement, or enhance the user’s skills, background knowledge, and expertise -- not replace them?
2. Is the component presentation and/or operations easy to learn, use and understand? (e.g. simple and intuitive)

11. Pleasing Interaction with Users

1. Is the design layout visually pleasing while providing functional value?
2. Has the simplified language and the use of colour been used with discretion?
3. Is the most frequently used function and/or piece of information in the most common, accessible and notable position?
4. Does the component display only the information needed by the user at any given point in time?
5. Does the component do what it is suppose to do in a simple, timely and expected manner?

12. Privacy

1. For data entry, does the component help the user to protect personal or private information?
2. Does the component in context of its surrounding environment make users feel secure in accessing and/or interacting with it?

13. Limit Data-Driven Tasks

1. Does the component reduce cognitive load by summarizing the data?
2. Processing: Are the number of steps taken by the user to fully understand, comprehend and reach the desired information kept to an effective minimum?
3. Are elements placed and grouped together in a logical fashion in order to reduce the time spent assimilating raw data?
4. Are meaningful, relevant and appropriate images, icons or graphic elements used to ‘fast-track’ the information being processed and presented to the user by providing added value? (e.g. a graphic image says a thousand words)

14. Reduce Uncertainty

1. Is the layout of information presented in a simple meaningful manner that is clear and obvious for interpretation? (e.g. avoiding computer jargon, esp. for errors)
2. Does the component use familiar frameworks and everyday terms to make it easier to absorb and to understand for intended user comfort levels?
3. Does the system gray out or delete labels of currently inactive functions while leaving active functions, choices and options available for selection?
4. Is the text legible, readable, clear, concise and relevant using functional key care words? (e.g. words that users care about and can relate to)
5. Are graphic elements familiar and immediately recognizable as to what they mean and what they represent?

15. Mobile Usage (with the ‘mobile-show’ component turned on)

1. Does the component display and work on different major operating systems? (e.g. Android, iOS, Windows, BB10/QNX, Chrome, etc.)
2. Does it display and work in different major mobile web browsers?
3. Does the component appropriately, properly and accordingly resize to fit the desired hand-held mobile screen? (e.g. viewable in its entirety)
4. Do all the functions work properly on the smaller screen environment?
5. Is there a sufficient amount of space and/or “hotspot” area to efficiently and effectively select an item (e.g. input field, slider, etc.) on the component?
6. Does the component provide a positive and comparable user experience on hand-held mobile devices, compared to their desktop counterparts?

Return to component reviews index