What Is Information Architecture
Organize content into a structure users can guess, so that on any screen they know where they are, where they can go, and how to get back.
What you'll run into
- 用户说找不到某个功能，但它明明就在那儿
- 页面越加越多，导航塞不下了，只好加个「更多」
- 同一个东西在两个地方都能进，两边显示的还不一样
When you drive to an unfamiliar city, you rely on road signs to know where you are, on navigation to know how far is left, and on signs to know which way to turn at the next intersection. The nav, breadcrumbs, and hierarchy inside a product serve the same purpose.
Three questions
| 问题 | 用什么回答 | 答不上来会怎样 |
|---|---|---|
| 我在哪 | 导航高亮、面包屑、页面标题 | 用户不确定自己进对了没有，操作会犹豫 |
| 我能去哪 | 同级项、下级入口、相关推荐 | 用户以为功能不存在，其实是没找到入口 |
| 我怎么回来 | 面包屑每一级可点、返回、顶层入口常驻 | 用户只能靠浏览器后退，或者干脆重新开始 |
What it does and doesn't do
· 有哪些内容，怎么分组
· 每一组叫什么名字
· 分几层，谁是谁的下级
· 从哪些入口能进去
· 点了之后发生什么
· 加载和出错时怎么显示
· 操作能不能撤销
· 一次任务分几步走
Signals the architecture is wrong
- The navigation has "More," "Other," or "Tools" in it. These three words are signs of failed categorization — you couldn't find a proper bucket, so you opened a junk drawer.
- The same feature has entry points in three places. That means it has no fixed place in the structure — it can only be scattered around so users don't miss it.
- Navigation items shouldn't need explanatory text. If the name is right, no explanation is needed. Needing an explanation usually means the naming or grouping is off.
- New features don't know where to go. If every new feature triggers a fresh debate about placement, the original grouping logic doesn't hold.