February 03, 2010
|
Linking: quality, not quantity
|
743 hit(s)
More on linking. (Earlier post) Compare these snippets in which the reader is invited to go elsewhere for more information[1]:
Version 1
Version 2
Maybe it's just me, but I find the first version, you know, friendlier. The second version gives me link fatigue just looking at it.
When you're creating links, it's tempting (and easy) to add just one or more two links, because who knows, those might end up being just the ones that the reader needs. The shotgun approach. And pretty soon you have a couple dozen, and the reader's eyes glaze over.
Herewith, then, some thots for you to contemplate the next time that you make hyperlinks.
The ideal number of links to provide is one. That is, you link to the target document that is exactly what the reader needs right now.
 Every additional link is more work for the reader. They have to click the link, look at the target document, and decide if it contains the information they want.
Let's make up some statistics. Say that your goal is to provide a link to the one correct document that will help the user right now. If you provide one link, you have 100% success in getting the user to that document. If you provide two links, only one of them is correct; the reader has a 50% chance of getting to the right document with a single click. If you provide 10 links, the reader's odds of getting directly to the correct doc are ... You see where this is going.
Now, you will say that you don't know what that ideal target document is, so you provide a selection of target documents for the user. Fair enough. But who has to do the work to determine which is the correct target? If you just create a long list of undifferentiated links, you're putting that burden on the user. Is that fair? (Do they want to click through 16 links?)
So let me posit that ...
You, as the writer, are in a better position to judge what the reader needs right now than the reader is. You know more than the reader, both about what you're writing and about where to find more information. Therefore, it's up to you to do that work, think about what the reader needs, and provide just the right link.
Granted, this can be hard. You must:- Understand why you're giving the reader the link in the first place. What information is the reader missing that you need to send them to?
- Understand what the reader will get from the target document. This means that you know yourself what information the target document(s) contain, and how the target document relates to the first point.
- Understand where not to send the user. This is really the salient point. You probably have a choice of target documents; some are more useful than others. You must understand why it's not useful to send the user to some of your possible selections. (Not making this choice is why you see long lists of links.)
Remember what I said last time: every link is a bright, shiny object that you're putting in front of the reader, tempting them to go away right now (and possibly not return). If too many of the bright, shiny objects turn out to just be frustrating for the reader, they're going to stop trusting you and your many links.
Don't just link because you can. Make sure that every link you create is adding value and that know what that value is. As that dude says (sort of): link with the end in mind.
|
|
