I’m currently working on a microsite project, and it was suggested that we use a fat footer. This term, although sounding a bit derogatory at first, best describes this very popular (hence the alternate spelling) and usable approach to web design.
Thankfully the web has matured to the point where this is even feasible. The emphasis on absolute, above-the-fold content strategy has relaxed somewhat, and now users can enjoy the rest of the page, which can have some very useful content. And that content might just lie at the very end.
The bottom of the page can be in interesting hang-out, especially when punctuated with a fat footer. In the event that the user can’t find what their looking for, this can be the place to give them, and your website a second chance.
Carefully researching or strategizing which links will be most useful is the first step. Typically the main nagivation is duplicated along the bottom, so they don’t have to scroll all the way to the top just to get to them. They can be the same, but given a different graphical treatment. From there you can pull out more specific second and third level categories within the information taxonomy that can lead them to more granular content. Probably the best part is that these links can be carefully organized, or have a more random structure; it’s a great way to incorporate a linking strategy that might not otherwise have a place to exist.
This technique is quickly replacing the sitemap, that is if it exists at all anymore. If user-centered analysis and design have been employed, the need for a sitemap grows smaller, and if the proper primary nouns have been used, the fat footer can be much more useful in exposing more granular content.
In the past, I have taken the shortcut of including a tag cloud as my fat footer. But these days, I am constructing far more structured and useful ones, even if the links do take on a more random approach to navigation.
No comments:
Post a Comment