The first thing I wanted to talk about relates to the design aspect of this discussion. When you open Orbis, it immediately opens the “About” pop-up. When this happened, I read through the different tabs on the left that serve as a header. At the time, I simply thought of the initial appearance as being neat and well-organized, but this impression changed once I was finished with reading about the project.
Instead, having it appear immediately is because it serves as the project’s entire introduction. The moment you close out of it, you’re bombarded by a map of Europe that dominates the whole screen. In this way, the site’s design aims to deliver its research first and foremost. All the miscellaneous information is sequestered in the “About” tab so it doesn’t take up valuable screen space, which is summarily given to the Orbis system. The only other thing that takes up space that doesn’t have to do with computing routes or travel flow is a tutorial on how to use it: clicking on it gives you bubbles that guide you right on the page, which is a transparent and strong way of giving help.
Heading back to “About”, it gave a comprehensive analysis of the design decisions that went into making Orbis (the map system, not the site). Some parts of this discussion went directly to the “Building” page. Meanwhile, the “Understanding” page continued to point out numerous issues or possible paths that the project could have done but did not. For example, the decision to cull certain paths and routes from being factored into calculations for numerous reasons: it would be time-consuming, difficult, and would not factor majorly into determining lines of travel. Personally, I found this type of self-analysis to be the most interesting, and as a reminder to observe our own project’s decision-making as we examine our research topic.
The first thing I wanted to talk about relates to the design aspect of this discussion. When you open Orbis, it immediately opens the “About” pop-up. When this happened, I read through the different tabs on the left that serve as a header. At the time, I simply thought of the initial appearance as being neat and well-organized, but this impression changed once I was finished with reading about the project.
Instead, having it appear immediately is because it serves as the project’s entire introduction. The moment you close out of it, you’re bombarded by a map of Europe that dominates the whole screen. In this way, the site’s design aims to deliver its research first and foremost. All the miscellaneous information is sequestered in the “About” tab so it doesn’t take up valuable screen space, which is summarily given to the Orbis system. The only other thing that takes up space that doesn’t have to do with computing routes or travel flow is a tutorial on how to use it: clicking on it gives you bubbles that guide you right on the page, which is a transparent and strong way of giving help.
Heading back to “About”, it gave a comprehensive analysis of the design decisions that went into making Orbis (the map system, not the site). Some parts of this discussion went directly to the “Building” page. Meanwhile, the “Understanding” page continued to point out numerous issues or possible paths that the project could have done but did not. For example, the decision to cull certain paths and routes from being factored into calculations for numerous reasons: it would be time-consuming, difficult, and would not factor majorly into determining lines of travel. Personally, I found this type of self-analysis to be the most interesting, and as a reminder to observe our own project’s decision-making as we examine our research topic.