I'm looking to build a "quick link" directory access widget. e.g. (option 1)
我希望构建一个“快速链接”目录访问小部件。例如(选项1)
0-9 | A-F | G-K | L-P | Q-U | V-Z
Where each would be a link into sub-chunks of a directory starting with that character. The widget itself would be used in multiple places for looking up contacts, companies, projects, etc.
其中每个都是一个以该字符开头的目录子块的链接。小部件本身可以在多个地方用于查找联系人、公司、项目等。
Now, for the programming part... I want to know if I should split as above...
现在，对于编程部分……我想知道我是否应该像上面那样分开……
0-9 | A-F | G-K | L-P | Q-U | V-Z
10+ 6 5 5 5 5
This split is fairly even and logically grouped, but what I'm interested to know is if there is a more optimal split based on the quantity of typical results starting with each letter. (option 2)
这个分割是相当均匀和合乎逻辑的分组，但我感兴趣的是，是否有一个更优的分割，基于以每个字母开头的典型结果的数量。(选择2)
e.g. very few items will start with "Q".
很少有项目会以“Q”开头。
(Note: this is currently for a "North American/English" deployment.)
(注意:这是目前的“北美/英语”部署。)
Does anyone have any stats that would backup reasons to split differently?
有没有人有任何统计数据可以支持分开的理由?
Likewise, for usability how do users like/dislike this type of thing? I know mentally if I am looking for say: "S" it takes me a second to recall it falls in the Q-U section.
同样，对于可用性，用户喜欢/不喜欢这种类型的东西?我心里知道，如果我在寻找“S”，我需要一秒钟才能回忆起它落在Q-U部分。
Would it be better to do a big list like this? (option 3)
像这样列一个大单子会更好吗?(选择3)
#|A|B|C|D|E|F|G|H|I|J|K|L|M|N|O|P|Q|R|S|T|U|V|W|X|Y|Z
6 个解决方案
#1
3
As a user I would most definitely prefer one link per letter.
作为一个用户，我绝对希望每个字母都有一个链接。
But better (for me as a user) would be a search box.
但更好的(对我来说是一个用户)将是一个搜索框。
#2
4
I would suggest one link per letter and hide the letters that don't have any results (if that doesn't asks for too much processing power).
我建议每个字母都有一个链接，并隐藏那些没有任何结果的字母(如果不需要太多的处理能力)。
#3
3
I think you're splitting the wrong things. You shouldn't evenly split letters, you should evenly split the results (as best as you can).
我觉得你们分错东西了。你不应该平均地分割字母，你应该平均地分割结果(尽可能地最好)。
If you want 20 results per page, and A has 28, while B-C have 15 you'll want to have
如果你想要每页20个结果，A有28个，而B-C有15个，你会想要。
A
一个
B-C
c
and so on.
等等。
Additionally, you might have to consider why you are using alphabet chunking instead of something a bit more contextual. The problem with alphabet chunking is that users have to know the name of what they are looking for, and that name has to be the same as yours.
此外，您可能需要考虑为什么要使用字母分块，而不是使用一些更上下文的东西。字母分块的问题是用户必须知道他们要找的名字，而且这个名字必须和你的名字一样。
EDIT: We've tested this in lab conditions, and users locate information in chunk by results vs chunk by number of letters in pretty much the same way.
编辑:我们已经在实验室条件下测试过了，用户可以用同样的方法根据结果和字母数量来定位信息。
EDIT_2: Chunking by letters almost always tests poorly. Think if there are any better ways to do this.
用字母分割几乎总是测试得很差。想一下有没有更好的方法。
#4
1
Well, one of the primary usability considerations is evenly-distributed groups, so either your current idea (0-9, A-F, etc.) would work well, or the list with each individual letter. Having inconsistently-sized groups is a definite no-no for a user interface.
主要的可用性考虑因素之一是均匀分布的组，所以您当前的想法(0-9、A-F等)可以很好地工作，或者列表中每个单独的字母。对于用户界面来说，拥有不一致大小的组是绝对的禁忌。
#5
1
You probably definitely don't want to split across a number - that is, something like
你肯定不希望把数字分开，也就是说，像这样
0-4 | 5-B | ...
Besides that, I'd say just see where your data lies. Write a program to do groupings of two, three, four, five, etc... and see what the most even split for each grouping is. Pick the one that seems nicest. If you have sparse data, then having one link per letter might be annoying if there are only 1 or 2 directories with that name.
除此之外，我要说的是看看你的数据在哪里。编写一个程序，做2、3、4、5等的分组。看看每个组的平均分裂是多少。挑一个看起来最好的。如果您有稀疏的数据，那么如果每个字母只有一个或两个同名的目录，那么每个字母都有一个链接可能会很烦人。
Then again, it depends what a typical user will be looking for. I can't tell what that might be just from your description - are they just navigating a directory tree?
然后，这又取决于一个典型的用户需要什么。我无法从您的描述中看出这可能是什么——它们只是在导航目录树吗?
#6
0
I almost always use the last option since it is by far the easier to navigate for a user. Use that if you have enough room for it and the other one if you have a limited amount of screen estate.
我几乎总是使用最后一个选项，因为到目前为止，它更容易为用户导航。如果你有足够的空间，可以使用它，如果你有有限的屏幕空间，可以使用它。
#1
3
As a user I would most definitely prefer one link per letter.
作为一个用户，我绝对希望每个字母都有一个链接。
But better (for me as a user) would be a search box.
但更好的(对我来说是一个用户)将是一个搜索框。
#2
4
I would suggest one link per letter and hide the letters that don't have any results (if that doesn't asks for too much processing power).
我建议每个字母都有一个链接，并隐藏那些没有任何结果的字母(如果不需要太多的处理能力)。
#3
3
I think you're splitting the wrong things. You shouldn't evenly split letters, you should evenly split the results (as best as you can).
我觉得你们分错东西了。你不应该平均地分割字母，你应该平均地分割结果(尽可能地最好)。
If you want 20 results per page, and A has 28, while B-C have 15 you'll want to have
如果你想要每页20个结果，A有28个，而B-C有15个，你会想要。
A
一个
B-C
c
and so on.
等等。
Additionally, you might have to consider why you are using alphabet chunking instead of something a bit more contextual. The problem with alphabet chunking is that users have to know the name of what they are looking for, and that name has to be the same as yours.
此外，您可能需要考虑为什么要使用字母分块，而不是使用一些更上下文的东西。字母分块的问题是用户必须知道他们要找的名字，而且这个名字必须和你的名字一样。
EDIT: We've tested this in lab conditions, and users locate information in chunk by results vs chunk by number of letters in pretty much the same way.
编辑:我们已经在实验室条件下测试过了，用户可以用同样的方法根据结果和字母数量来定位信息。
EDIT_2: Chunking by letters almost always tests poorly. Think if there are any better ways to do this.
用字母分割几乎总是测试得很差。想一下有没有更好的方法。
#4
1
Well, one of the primary usability considerations is evenly-distributed groups, so either your current idea (0-9, A-F, etc.) would work well, or the list with each individual letter. Having inconsistently-sized groups is a definite no-no for a user interface.
主要的可用性考虑因素之一是均匀分布的组，所以您当前的想法(0-9、A-F等)可以很好地工作，或者列表中每个单独的字母。对于用户界面来说，拥有不一致大小的组是绝对的禁忌。
#5
1
You probably definitely don't want to split across a number - that is, something like
你肯定不希望把数字分开，也就是说，像这样
0-4 | 5-B | ...
Besides that, I'd say just see where your data lies. Write a program to do groupings of two, three, four, five, etc... and see what the most even split for each grouping is. Pick the one that seems nicest. If you have sparse data, then having one link per letter might be annoying if there are only 1 or 2 directories with that name.
除此之外，我要说的是看看你的数据在哪里。编写一个程序，做2、3、4、5等的分组。看看每个组的平均分裂是多少。挑一个看起来最好的。如果您有稀疏的数据，那么如果每个字母只有一个或两个同名的目录，那么每个字母都有一个链接可能会很烦人。
Then again, it depends what a typical user will be looking for. I can't tell what that might be just from your description - are they just navigating a directory tree?
然后，这又取决于一个典型的用户需要什么。我无法从您的描述中看出这可能是什么——它们只是在导航目录树吗?
#6
0
I almost always use the last option since it is by far the easier to navigate for a user. Use that if you have enough room for it and the other one if you have a limited amount of screen estate.
我几乎总是使用最后一个选项，因为到目前为止，它更容易为用户导航。如果你有足够的空间，可以使用它，如果你有有限的屏幕空间，可以使用它。