HanneApers
commented
3 years ago Just to add to this issue, I think the end-result of the guided process should not have a static, but a dynamic presentation. A good example for me (although only available in Dutch) is this one. It's a website made by the Belgian news service to illustrate the journey of a migrant who has to leave the Belgian territory. Here you start with the first step, a visual presentation, you click on it to get more detailed information (a video, link to other websites, a speech component) and depending on the 'answer' you choose in that pop-up box, you end up at the next step and are literally 'guided' through the process.
I don't know if this is too early in the process, but we were told to leave any issue in GitHub, so I'll submit this as well :). How is the final lay-out intended to look like? In general, I think it's too text-based: in the 'integration step-by-step' an alphabetical list of all processes should not be the first option, in my opinion. It should be more thematically and visually organised (such as these websites: zanzu.be or fedasilinfo.be). Concerning the icon use: how were these defined/chosen? I personally find the 'asylum seeker' icon not very well chosen, even a bit offensive. Will the choice of icons still be reviewed/discussed? Concerning the visulatisation of the 'guided processes' : at this point I don't think the use of text style, graph visualisation etc. is very attractive nor user-friendly. It's again very text-based and the graph itself is very basic. It would be nice if the graph is centralized (and made more attractive) and the explanation of the steps is seen in a pop-up box when clicked on/ scrolled over. The text within the steps is published as a failed html-coding.
Sorry if this issue is not relevant right now and this will be worked on in a later stage. However, I do think this is very important as the lay-out and user-friendliness will determine if users will come back and really use the application.