Site Review - http://www.freedictionary.org

Eric Marshall
Site Review


http://www.freedictionary.org/On Information Design

* Who are the users?
Users are English speakers needing to look up a word. Could be any age or any level of English speaker.

* Information chunk (gestalt principle, amount information)
Information is kept to a minimum. Very sparse like google.

* Relevance (graphics, content, reading level, text)
Although the site is very simple the Google Ads are a little distracting.

* Labeling (visual with text)
Simple to use. "search" is only real label.

* Consistency (visual, text)
Definitions are formatted consistently.

* Detail (too much on one page or one screen)
Because it displays the results of several dictionaries there can be several screens of info. It's all text, so scrolls pretty easily though.


On Interactivity

* Orientation (Can you find the path, and know your way around?)
interaction is kept to a minimum. Search for word, or follow links of synonyms within definitions.

* Navigation (Branching)
The site is essentially flat. There is only one level within each definition.

* Functionality (Does it work?)
Yes, simple and easy to use.

* Information access (Multiple entry and exit? Logical path?)
again, limited choices make it easy to use.


On Screen Design
# Attractive (first impression)
Not really attractive. Only one bar of gold color at the top on home page. There are blue subheads on definition pages. I find the blue of the Google Ads links overpowers the understated search results.

# Resolution
n/a

# Color
Maybe overly simple.

# Lay out
one column. Easy to navigate and use.

# Readability
Very readable.