Wed

03

Sep

2008

Blow by Blow: The Joomla.org Redesign

In my inaugural post, I thought it best to dispense with the usual fluff and get right to the meat and potatoes of the new redesign of Joomla.org. There have been many questions and we have many answers.

I'll start off by giving a brief timeline. The project was initiated last year sometime, but due to the launch of Joomla 1.5 and resources allocated to that (understandably a priority) it didn't get into full swing until early February 2008—around the time the Joomla Communications Team was officially formed. One of our top goals was to fast-track the site redesign because it had been on the back burner for too long.
 
Our strategic approach to the project was fairly straightforward. We set out to accomplish a number of things:
  1. To restructure the Joomla family of Web sites in a more logical and easier to understand fashion, including better integration
  2. To clearly define the types of Joomla users, identify resources for each of those types, and make resources easy for each of those types to locate by consolidation and other means (focused streamlining)
  3. To bring more focus on the day-to-day community-driven aspects of the Joomla Project
  4. To identify and clarify site and Project nomenclature
  5. To bring a fresh, updated look with a consistent navigation style for all sites
This is not an exhaustive list, but were high-priority items. There were even things we didn't want to accomplish. The redesign was not intended to:
  1. Push Joomla in terms of what it can do or demonstrate its full potential
  2. Hide or make certain resources less easier to find or delete them altogether
  3. Make every single person happy
Again, not an exhaustive list. But of note was that getting a consensus on a design from everyone who visits Joomla.org would have been impossible. Think about the different types of users, tastes, opinions—it never would have happened.
 
The next three tasks occurred in tandem:
  1. Competitive audit: We performed a a visual and functional audit on the sites of other content management systems, analyzing what they do well and where they fail. This led to a summary of observations and requirements.
  2. Development of User Personas: Based on interviews with Joomla users (online and offline), obvious patterns were formed which categorized users into one of three persona groups:
    • New users ("Beginners")- Users which are coming to Joomla for the first time, commonly to evaluate it for possible use on a project
    • Regular users ("Intermediate")- Users which are designers, Webmasters, site admins and are currently using Joomla
    • Developers ("Advanced")- Users which are "power users" and have a deeper level of programming experience. They probably have written an extension for Joomla or may have a business based around Joomla services.

    Using each of these "persona shells," clearer and more defined user personas were developed with information gathered in our research.

  3. Development of the Information Architecture: We performed a content audit on all information contained on the Joomla family of sites and created an extensive IA based on the current setup. Then we hashed out the information taxonomies in a purely logical arrangement so the structure as a whole made sense from a purely informational standpoint, creating a new draft IA.
Taking each of the personas above and our first draft of the information architecture, the task was then to develop multiple user scenarios for each of those personas and test their tasks against the IA. How would users find the information they needed? How quickly? As you might have guessed, the IA (and subsequent wireframes) went through several rounds of refinement in order for it to become more task-focused. 
 
The initial phase up until this point lasted about a month. We learned a lot about what Joomla users of all levels look for and how they look for it. My next posting will be about the next steps, including the design process.
 
9 Votes

10 Comments

Feed
  1. Great work Ron as well as others who have been helping out with this.

    Next step.. roll out the other sites :P
  2. I'm very excited about the changes and the focus on usability and user experience. It's this kind of attention to these important issues that makes Joomla enduring and excellent.
  3. I like the design and the "IA" but how about a search button.
  4. Sorry, Jonias, I deleted your post. You need to share a valid email address - that we will not share with others - in order for your comments to be posted. Thanks for understanding!
  5. Why there is no search functionality in the site, No sitemap in the home page ?
  6. Wow, the amount of jargon in this post is unbelievable, there's a lot of text that says nothing. Read the part about "Development of the Information Architecture" and tell me it means something. In just one sentence you wrote "purely logical arrangement" and "purely informational standpoint", huh?
  7. See the follow up post for more info about the search functionality:

    http://community.joomla.org/contributors/communications/488-blow-by-blow-part-two.html
  8. Yes, liam, I'll be happy to elaborate or rephrase something to make it more clearer.

    A content audit basically is creating a list of every single piece of content on the Joomla family of sites. Based on the type and amount of information, we created taxonomies, which are basically "groupings" of information. For example, in the content audit, we saw there were 300 pieces of content that related to Joomla 1.0.x while there were 3 items pertaining to a particular component. Since the number of items related to Joomla 1.0.3 were at a certain level, it made sense to create a taxonomy for that, but not for the 3 items in this example. These 3 items would get grouped into another taxonomy. This was the "logical" part.

    Continued in next comment....
  9. (Cont'd from previous comment)--Once that process is complete, we have a list of taxonomies, which were arranged into IA form. Loosely defined, an information architecture is a hierarchy of those taxonomies, the "heavier" points taking precedent. This resulting IA was "purely informational" because it represented the taxonomies, without any other influences (for example, giving certain information more weight because of the type of information). Make sense?
  10. (Cont'd from previous comment)--Sorry if the "jargon" is confusing for you. These terms actually mean something and they are used every day with the clients I work with. There are a lot of great resources online for User Experience (which is what each of these points fall under), including Jesse James Garrett (a friend and one of the best Information Architects on the planet) and just about anything written or said by Jeff Veen (another friend and founder of Adaptive Path). These are just two examples in the vast world of UX. If there are any more confusing points, feel free to ask further.

Add Comment


    • >:o
    • :-[
    • :'(
    • :-(
    • :-D
    • :-*
    • :-)
    • :P
    • :\
    • 8-)
    • ;-)