Using “Site maps” as a mean of navigation
Over the years, technology has matured and so has our ability to conceive, ideate and design better (in general). Yet we still rely, more often than necessary, on a tool designed and conceived years ago because our navigation means were either; too difficult to understand, not compatible with a plethora of devices (i.e. screen readers) among others. We still rely on using Site maps, after all this years.
Why target site map? Why stop there? Hmm good question.
A website is nothing more than a story with interactive structure (wow, I had no clue I could think so “elegantly”). As an Interaction Designer / Information Architect it falls on me, and I gladly accept it, to craft a navigation system that helps address users needs and influences users, helping craft a series of interactions and paths so that our users have a pleasant experience (can’t find the link to a Boxes & Arrows podcast regarding “user experience” and how WE - read IxD’s and IA’s - don’t create experiences, we create elements that influence it though, I’ll update this post when I find it).
So, let’s get technical for a bit - here’s Wikipedia definition of a “Site map”:
A site map (or sitemap) is a representation of the architecture of a web site. It can be either a document in any form used as a planning tool for web design, or a web page that lists the pages on a web site, typically organized in hierarchical fashion. This helps visitors and search engine bots find pages on the site.
While some developers argue that site index is a more appropriately used term to relay page function, web visitors are used to seeing each term and generally associate both as one and the same. However, a site index is often used to mean an A-Z index that provides access to particular content, while a site map provides a general top-down view of the overall site contents.
So, a “Site map” is in essence a bunch of links (ordered) on a page, it’s important because search engines will pick it up and index it (h1 tags and all that jazziness). It could, potentially, offer users who have certain technologies blocked by their provider (read Flash in a corporate setting) could access the site’s content. Great.
But what are we missing here? The hand-holding, that off-camera voice that makes sense of what is on screen. We’re missing those crafted paths. We’re missing the story.
Wikipedia goes on to say that the benefits of a “Site map” - bear with me, I’m about to make a point here, I promise - are:
Site maps can improve search engine optimization of a site by making sure that all the pages can be found. This is especially important if a site uses Adobe Flash or JavaScript menus that do not include HTML links.
Most search engines will only follow a finite number of links from a page, so if a site is very large, the site map may be required so that search engines and visitors can access all content on the site.
That first sentence reinforces what I said above, “Site maps” are great for SEO and in instances where a certain technology is blocked by a provider. But pay attention to the bold part in the second statement; “the site map may be required so that visitors can access all content on the site” not only is this a false and unvalidated statement (just like the one I am making) but it reflects a challenge that we, as designers face, our solutions - numerous times - do not go in accordance with our audience, and they are forced to rely on mediums like “Site maps”.
Then, there’s the other face of the coin, developers need to be conscious of audience needs, think about our users. Using Adobe Flash without making use of all of it’s accessibility features [Adobe on accessibility] is a waste of resources. Creating a robust JavaScript driven menu that a screen reader of a specific browser can’t comprehend is a waste of resources. Not thinking of the different scenarios that a specific item will be seen in - is a waste of resources and simply stupid.
So, we can agree that a “Site map” while important (read above) should not be used as a main navigation item, and much less when we replace traditional navigation behavior for it. What do I mean? I present you with Evidence A.1 - AmericaSupportsYou.mil:
What, you can’t see it? Fine - here’s Evidence A.2:
See it now? I thought so - the site’s designers opted for a not-too-often used navigation design where the main items are displayed on the right [2] (right-handed navigation if you will). But they’ve also elevated to their user’s first reading coordinates [1].
This site is geared to latin-based languages users, “Why?” You ask? Simple, structure starts on top-left and ends on right, sentences follow this structure. Other languages are right-aligned and as such start on top-right like Arabic - I think.
So, how’s that for influencing an experience? It’s not too good I tell you. User’s are almost recommended either the “Site map” or the search bar.
How to improve this? Simple:
- Move those items to the footer, where they belong (except for the home item)
- Change your template so that your navigation is on the left, instead of the right (yes I know, on the right it looks “sooo cool”)
- Think about your users, next time you get such a great idea
What do I base my opinions on? Besides the fact that I’ve been doing this for a while now, I read the best and brightest minds writings (I won’t name-drop just yet 
) - and guess what? They agree with me. Yeah, suck it up.
What prompted this? A simple question based on frustration.
I asked “in 2008, why do you offer a “site map”? Could be a client demand, sometimes it’s for SEO and almost always it’s because the navigation SUCKS.” on Twitter and received numerous replies, from both sides of the fence and some out of the park by a lot:
- @eelain212: marriage
- @tmarman: laziness and/or incompetence are the only explanations.
- @eelain212: sitemap, shitemap.. forget the DIY navigation, hire an internet driver.. like a cab, u’ll be there in a jiffy!
- @yoni: i’d say sitemaps are worth having, but not something users should be steered toward. they are good for seo & last resorts
So what do I recommend, in general? A sound navigation system aided by numerous mediums to achieve a site’s goal, one of them and probably the most important one - to tell a story (whether that story is selling shoes, forcing you to buy 40 addons for a domain name - see GoDaddy.com - or to actually tell you a story - see We Tell Stories).
I’m done ranting - the soapbox is all yours.
Update (trying to be honest and all):
- @tmarman:
ha, great article, but just for the record my laziness/incompetence jab was about not supporting non-www DNS 
- @tmarman: but I guess it works for both
