Four Organizing Structures
The relationships between content decide the structure. First read whether this batch of content is tree-shaped, table-shaped, chain-shaped, or net-shaped — then decide how to organize the interface.
What you will run into
- 分类怎么分都有东西放不进去，或者能放进两个分类
- 用户要找一个东西，得先猜它被归到了哪一类
- 层级越挖越深，第四层往下基本没人到达
How to Choose
| 结构 | 什么时候用它 | 代价 |
|---|---|---|
| 层级 | 内容天然有从属关系，一个东西只属于一个分类 | 分类边界模糊时会很痛苦，用户得猜你怎么归的类 |
| 矩阵 | 一个东西同时有多个属性，用户从不同角度找它 | 要做好筛选和排序，否则等于把难题丢给用户 |
| 线性 | 步骤有严格先后，前一步没完成后一步没意义 | 中途要能退回和保存，否则用户断在半路就全丢了 |
| 自然 | 内容之间的关联比归属更重要，探索本身是价值 | 新用户会迷路，必须配一个入口页或者推荐 |
Usually It's a Mix
Real products rarely use only one. A common combination: hierarchy overall, a matrix inside a certain layer, and a linear flow for key tasks.
层级首页 → 品类 → 子品类，用户按分类逛
矩阵子品类里按价格、品牌、评分交叉筛选
线性下单流程：地址 → 支付 → 完成，不能跳步
自然详情页底部的「看了又看」，靠关联跳转
What Choosing Wrong Looks Like
- Using hierarchy when you should use a matrix. The tell: "Miscellaneous" or "Other" shows up, or the same item sits in multiple categories and they drift out of sync.
- Using natural flow when you should use hierarchy. The tell: new users open the app and don't know where to start, so they fall back to search.
- Using free navigation when you should use a linear flow. The tell: users skip around, and only at submit do they find they missed required steps.
- Forcing categories when the content is naturally linked. The tell: items are clearly related, but the UI shows none of it, so users hunt from memory.