The students’ first year Human Computer Interaction (HCI) module asks them to design an “electronic document shopping system” that could enable book publishers to create a unique environment dedicated to the marketing and sale of electronic-only content.

We were invited to talk to the students, explaining a little bit about the commercial environment of perfoming HCI, or usability design, and how their project relates to the live work that we do at Semantico. Expecting a sea of blank faces, I was pleasantly surprised to find that they were interested, listening, and even posed a few questions. Questions that, sometimes, were not easy to answer.

Here’s the news:

Student: “I just wanted to know why DRM is still an issue considering the lessons learned by the music industry, now that iTunes has unlocked everything”.

Me: “erm…”

To be honest, I don’t know. There are lots of issues affecting the feasibility of eBook publishing models right now, from user demand to digital paper technology, but DRM is a funny one. In many respects, the student in question had just pointed out the elephant in many of our rooms.

But that’s old ground. What was even more informative about the time I spent on campus on behalf of Semantico was seeing and hearing today’s University students in action, and it caused me to think again about the nature of user research. Are we trying to design for today, or to capture and anticipate tomorrow?

eBook publishing stands on the brink of a new era. Users may not know yet what they want. We may need to take the lead in answering some of the biggest questions: What do we sell – chapters, volumes or subscriptions? How do we monitor use? Who controls the content? Is platform independence possible?

Those students didn’t have the answers, but as many of the boldest and most successful online innovations have germinated in halls just like this around the world, we are certainly going to be listening to their ideas.

Each year, the team uses the calendar to illustrate ’stoopid’ interface choices, from distracting mashups to meaningless metaphors.

Great for cubicle walls.

Cover of Digital Britain report

Last month saw the publication of the interim Digital Britain report from UK Minister for Communications Stephen Carter and his team. Most of the headlines have focused on the ‘2MB for all by 2012′ promise, but the report raises other issues for digital publishing.

National high-speed broadband access is likely to be a reality if not in 3 then at least 5 years time – regardless of the Government – as users expect more and more instant access to media and communications, free and online. The report’s target in this regard – everyone in Britain to have access to broadband with a data rate of at least 2 megabits per second by 2012 – is in any case undemanding, since this can already be delivered to over 90% of the population (source: Informitv), and the average broadband home in Britain actually receives around 3.6Mbps at the moment (source: Ofcom).

Neither can the report be said to be particularly forward-looking, with its focus on DAB (a format which consumers have not shown themselves to be that enthusiastic about so far) and digital television networks: there is mounting evidence that the under-30 age group regularly, if not exclusively, access entertainment media through the internet.

The report is right in noting, however, the importance of wireless broadband for current and future delivery of content. The surge in demand created by the popularity of the iPhone and other factors has made this channel increasingly vital.

While the main focus of the report is on audio / visual content, there are several key points that relate to the online publishing market.

The government’s acknowledgement that more needs to be done to secure copyright and prevent piracy will be welcomed. And users will applaud their encouragement for new forms of delivery that meet digital consumer demand. It’s not a new issue, but it is one that is yet to be resolved in online publishing – new business models for digital delivery are needed to create revenue from online usage. These will inevitably centre on flexible content delivery in small chunks, and the creation of easy-to-use environments to discover and deliver that content.

Carter sees the solution to delivery and DRM as a “win / win / win” scenario. Many in publishing are sceptical – perhaps reasonably so – but hesitation will not reap rewards. And what this report reminds us is that the ground is moving beneath our feet and at an accelerating rate.

With the government seemingly committed (although not committing notable resources) to increasing digital capacity and competence across the UK, we should not doubt that consumer expectations will continue to rise. Our services will succeed if they are ready – not just for the ‘old hands’ who we need to lure away from illegal peer-to-peer networks, but for the new consumers for whom new devices and increased infrastructure are providing digital access without the need for expert understanding. Will we buy eBooks through digitally enabled media centres (once known as televisions)? Perhaps. Will mobile phone know-how be all you need to access library content from around the world? Maybe.

One thing is for sure – we will never move fast enough to get ahead of expectation, but with constant vigilance, flexible strategies, and innovation we can be ready for the next big thing.

- More about the Digital Britain Report from the Dept. for Culture, Media and Sport website

- Download the Digital Britain Interim Report (from the DCMS website – pdf 1.5MB)

A facet is one feature of something that has many aspects. For example a facet of a car might be its colour, its engine size, the year it was manufactured, etc.

So far, so good. But there are significant wrinkles with most implementations that need ironing out. Let’s take a look at some illustrative examples.

1 The real estate problem

Here’s the Ocado shopping interface (click to see a bigger view).

Ocado: users can narrow their results using a range of facets

But I can’t see all the facets in a group – and the ‘More’ link is quite weak. This is great news for those products at the top of the list, but lethal for any that fall off. How do we choose what goes at the top?

2 The facet type problem

The facet list gets harder to use the more types (category, temporal, numeric, geographical, etc.) you have in the same interface. And list ordering of the facets can get a little crazy if the same rules are applied to each type.

Here’s how ebay deals with it:

ebay users can choose from a range of facets, each with a different control

Categories are given priority, and each type of facet selector and display is designed according to its type and the perception of its use. To create space on the interface, other refinement options are collapsed.

3 The labelling problem

OK, so I’ve found a chair in my price range that will fit into my daughter’s dolls house, and the seller is near enough to my home. But did I find the very best chair? Or is it possible that other, relevant results got lost inside a category I didn’t explore?

Faceted navigation is very good at getting users closer to ‘better fit’ results, but it is also very good at losing results.

Because selecting one facet tends to exclude the others, items in categories that users overlook will be hidden – unless a polyhierarchical systems is used (and then each facet’s population grows bigger – see problem 1).

Think about your local telephone directory. You might be looking for a gas plumber under ‘G’ for ‘Gas’, while all the gas plumbers have actually chosen to advertise under ‘P’ for ‘Plumber’ – or even ‘W’ for ‘Water and Sewerage Services’. Telephone directories use ’see also’ listings extensively to get round this problem.

4 The selection sequence problem

So here comes the big one. Selecting facets affects other facets. How do you design the interaction to cope with this? We can constrain the sequence of selection, but let’s consider the options:

One at a time – Each time a user selects a facet the search is re-executed and the whole interface is updated.

This might represent the best method of presenting users with accurate information, but with big datasets users can be left waiting for a long time and need to be locked out of further interactions while they wait.

One from each group – Users can select one option from each facet group.

This is great for the developers because the results don’t need to combine options or eliminate duplication. It’s great for designers too because the inactive options can just be removed from the display.  But for users? What if you like yellow and blue? Users have to manually try out each combination.

Lots of facets, one at a time – Users select facets, in any order, and the interface responds to each choice.

This one looks great in a diagram, but what happens when it is implemented? Users are likely to consider and pick one facet at a time. Their choice restricts the options available at the next facet. This might be OK if they are looking for one particular result, but for browsing it is going to hide lots of results. The sequence of facet selection becomes critical.

Lots of facets, all at once – Users choose the facets to apply, and then apply them all simultaneously.

Not so good either. We are not really browsing by facets at all, just keyword searching with suggested terms. The onus is still on the user to guess which facet combination will yield results.

So there are four big challenges to be aware of with faceted navigation:

• stemmed category lists create a new market for real estate at the top
• presentation of controls on the interface needs care
• labels need to meet users expectations
• selection methods significantly effect the results

Faceted navigation is a great tool for discovery but, as with all tools, you need to be sure you are using the right one for the job. In the case of faceted navigation that means taking the users, the usage, the goals, the content, the budget, the timescales and the technology into consideration for each project and assessing whether this particular tool really makes sense for the objectives you are trying to fulfil.