|
|
Synopsis: The objective is to use eValid to measure objective quantities from a WebSite and use the resulting metrics to develop information of a more subjective nature. Comparative metrics would be highly valuable to webmasters because they could identify problems or issues of one WebSite relative to other WebSites in the same general subject area.
Summary
This page describes some possible WebSite Dimensions of Excellence
that can be measured objectively by eValid site analysis data.
The idea is that, using these metrics,
two or more WebSites can be compared against each other and/or
against pre-established standards.
There could be measures that are assessed subjectively that add to this list and the combination of an objective and subjective assessment may also be quite interesting.
| No. | Name | eValid Metrics Basis | Comparison Axis |
| 1 | Maintenance Quality (Currency of Information) | Broken links/page & old pages/page. Derived direct from the site analysis unavailable and page age reports. | Poor --> Good |
| 2 | Responsiveness
(Navigation speed) | Proportion of slow pages to total number of pages. This value is shown in the summary report if slow page report is selected. | Slow --> Fast |
| 3 | Structural Complexity
Ease of Use | Maximum +/- depth from root per 3D-SiteMap chart & Number of links at each level | Complex --> Simple |
| 4 | Page Density | Component/page size: Average visible text size per page | Verbose --> Terse
Textual --> Visual |
| 5 | Connectivity
[Link Density] | Average number of links per page | Light --> Dense |
| Additional Dimensions of Excellence | |||
| 6 | Volume | Total number of pages on site, or total number of on-site pages out to pre-specified depth. | Small --> Large |
| 7 | Image/Text Ratio | Ratio of volume of bytes devoted to images (non-text items) relative to the total size of the site. | Low: All-Text --> High: All-Image |
| 8 | Annoyance | Number of popups, density of mailto's, volume of ads (off site links to images). | Low --> High |
| 9 | Depth | Gross depth of site, measured from top of the site. Or, the depth from the top of the 3D-SiteMap to the bottom of the 3D-SiteMap when started at the site root. | Shallow --> Deep |
Optimum Site Defined
As a "sanity check,"
suppose you do a N-way optimization on each of these metrics,
aiming to produce the best possible WebSite
-- i.e. one that maximizes each of the metrics.
What would you have?
The WebSite thus built would be one with these properties:
(1) possessing very current information and well-maintained;
(2) fast to navigate;
(3) relatively simple or clear in organization structure;
(4) relatively terse;
and,
(5) relatively densly linked.
While all of these features are desirable it is not clear
if one could ever obtain them simultaneously.
Probably you can't.
Pairwise Factor Charts
For the above defined metrics, here are how the (5,2) = 10 combinations sort out
in terms of what obtaining them pairwise might mean in regard to a WebSite.
Note that the (5,3) = 10 triple combinations could also be of interest.
In each case the idea is to have a 2-dimensional chart with the weakest
performing sites closest to [0,0] and the best performing sites
in the upper right hand side.
| Combination | Subjective Description |
| 1 x 2 | "Best Online Experience". This combination was used in a number of eValid published studies. |
| 1 x 3 | Best intrinsic quality focus. |
| 1 x 4 | Fastest access to data. |
| 1 x 5 | Measures how attentive the site owners are to keeping things current. "Assurance Level of Data Presented". "Easiest to maintain; ergo, highest quality data". |
| 2 x 3 | "Form follows function" best illustrated by this site. |
| 2 x 4 | Also addresses user experience because big volume interferes with speed of navigation. Measures "Logical completeness". |
| 2 x 5 | Most utility (responsive yet complex yet quick). |
| 3 x 4 | Best organized. |
| 3 x 5 | Most efficient. |
| 4 x 5 | Most accessibility (many, densely linked small pages). |
| Additional Subjective Descriptions | |
| 2 x 6 | Information retrieval usefulness. A big, efficiently organized site makes it possible to access a great deal of information quickly. |
Additional Notes
Some
server-side analyzers may be able to deliver some of these statistics
because they have the "inside view" on the WebSite.
The eValid advantage is that
examination of an accessible public WebSite is,
in and of its very nature,
un-blockable.
A company, by making its WebSite available to everyone,
is also making it possible for eValid to examine it extensively
-- in whatever detail can be accomplished --
and compare it with other WebSites for whatever purpose,
including [but not limited to] competitive analysis.
The technical considerations of the analysis are of relative importance only. If the sites being compared are all measured by the same machine over the same connection and at relatively the same time (serially during business hours), even variations introduced by web performance ebbs and flows tend to balance out in cross-site evaluations.
