On 21.08.2014 14:26, Risker wrote:
On 21 August 2014 05:31, Strainu
<strainu10(a)gmail.com> wrote:
...
I went to look at some of those same articles using my smartphone with
the
"desktop" option turned on. Many of them timed out without fully
loading;
others took several minutes. There was a very, very noticeable
difference
in load time between the mobile view and the desktop view. And that
was in
North America with fast, very good connection on an up-to-date phone.
Many
of our editors and readers don't have this kind of infrastructure
available
to them.
So - we know there is a definite cost to having all these "navigation
aids"
in articles. We need to justify their use, instead of simply adding
them
by reflex. So here is where analytics teams can really be useful:
tell us
whether or not these navboxes are actually being used to go to other
articles. If they're widely used to leap to the next article, then we
need
to find ways to make them more efficient so that they're suitable for
mobile devices. If they're hardly ever being used, we need to
reconsider
their existence. Perhaps this becomes some sort of "meta data" tab
from
articles. The current format isn't sustainable, though.
Risker/Anne
_______________________________________________
For me the conclusion would be not that we should drop them altogether
in the mobile version (most of them are useful navigation means after
all) but that the mobile version should be improved to parse them and to
present them as a piece of plain text, not as a template.
Cheers
Yaroslav