Number of results displayed per page on mobile device

30 Apr 2009 - 7:33pm
5 years ago
5 replies
895 reads
Eugene Kim
2005

Has anyone come across an example of search results which aren't
based on the "base-10" method of displaying results per page?

For example, I've got a situation where a legacy product is
currently displaying 9 results per page and the reasons I've
gathered are:

1) Each result is associated with a number on the keypad (press 1 to
go to 1st result on the page, 2 for the 2nd result, etc.), but the
number 0 is being reserved as a keypad shortcut for another
function.

2) Businesses make up the core of our search and they don't want to
be associated with 0 even though they're displayed as 10. (I've
been told they did "testing" on this, but haven't been given
anything to prove this other than someone's word.)

My initial thoughts are that sticking with a standard "view results
1 - 10" would override these, but only for consistency and the fact
that results 1-9, 10-18, 19-27, etc. looks pretty strange. It might
be something which causes the user to take pause as to why this is
occurring. But I don't feel that's really presenting a strong case
against the existing design.

Hope this makes sense. Any thoughts are appreciated, thanks.

Comments

30 Apr 2009 - 9:54pm
Dev Yamakawa
2007

>
> 2) Businesses make up the core of our search and they don't want to
> be associated with 0 even though they're displayed as 10. (I've
> been told they did "testing" on this, but haven't been given
> anything to prove this other than someone's word.)

Hi Eugene, Can you map the asterisk (*) key to the tenth result? Would
businesses object to that? A "star" is special treatment :). Off the top of
my head I recall seeing use of the asterisk as an accelerator in options
menus in the Gmail mobile app. The * mapped nicely to their concept of
starring messages in that case.

Dev

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Eugene Kim <v6 at mindspring.com> wrote:

> Has anyone come across an example of search results which aren't
> based on the "base-10" method of displaying results per page?
>
> For example, I've got a situation where a legacy product is
> currently displaying 9 results per page and the reasons I've
> gathered are:
>
> 1) Each result is associated with a number on the keypad (press 1 to
> go to 1st result on the page, 2 for the 2nd result, etc.), but the
> number 0 is being reserved as a keypad shortcut for another
> function.
>
> 2) Businesses make up the core of our search and they don't want to
> be associated with 0 even though they're displayed as 10. (I've
> been told they did "testing" on this, but haven't been given
> anything to prove this other than someone's word.)
>
> My initial thoughts are that sticking with a standard "view results
> 1 - 10" would override these, but only for consistency and the fact
> that results 1-9, 10-18, 19-27, etc. looks pretty strange. It might
> be something which causes the user to take pause as to why this is
> occurring. But I don't feel that's really presenting a strong case
> against the existing design.
>
> Hope this makes sense. Any thoughts are appreciated, thanks.
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

1 May 2009 - 8:54am
DampeS8N
2008

I wonder what the numbers of people using WAP browsers for your
function really are. Are you building with the iPhone in mind? That
would seem to be the stronger, growing, market for mobile web. And it
doesn't have this concern.

I've been doing search pages with variable sets of results for year.

I'm assuming you aren't considering 5 because you think it is too
small?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=41643

1 May 2009 - 2:18pm
Eugene Kim
2005

Dev, I'm actually reserving the asterisk and pound keys for zoom
functionality with our integrated map (users may swap between list
view and map view).

William, this is definitely for WAP-only users (we have separate
products for iPhone, Android, J2ME). As for using 5 results per
page, it's something I've thought about... 5 may be too few,
though.

In the end, maybe users just don't care about whether they see 9
results per page? They're more concerned about actual results, not
whether it shows 9 or 10 on a page, right?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=41643

1 May 2009 - 2:22pm
Andy Edmonds
2004

> In the end, maybe users just don't care about whether they see 9
> results per page? They're more concerned about actual results, not
> whether it shows 9 or 10 on a page, right?

Right, the critical information is the Page # for backtracking and landmarks.

A simple solution is to say "Page 1 of 14" and ignore the result count
alltogether in the UI language. -A

1 May 2009 - 7:37pm
Barbara Ballard
2005

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Eugene Kim <v6 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Has anyone come across an example of search results which aren't
> based on the "base-10" method of displaying results per page?
>

My current set of thoughts on numbered results with numbers enabled as
accesskeys:

- A lot of "good" browsers don't support these, and will display them
without making them controls. (Opera Mini, Blackberry) And a lot of
QWERTY devices don't support them. And of course devices without
keyboards won't respond to them.

- For more, check out
http://mobiforge.com/designing/blog/accesskeys-thinking-about-them-a-qwerty-world
(short version: http://is.gd/vYsK )

- A lot of browsers won't display a 0 next to item 10, so there isn't
a value there.

- The "good" browsers will typically be able to display more results;
if you limit results to only 9 or 10 you are forcing these folks to
have more page requests.

- For search results or advertising results, most users won't use the
accesskey. (There are exceptions, but the exceptions appear to be very
unlikely to use the web browser on the phone. ) This is because they
have to scroll down to read the results, and most will use the "fire"
(OK) button.

Summary: for search results, I don't recommend displaying the numbers
at all, or displaying the actual result number (e.g., "14") rather
than a false accesskey. The more advanced recommendation is to detect
the browser type, whether it has a QWERTY keyboard, and some other
stuff and display only for a 12-key keypad and maybe also Pocket IE.

Recommendations change a bit for sites where you can develop
expertise. The Gmail mobile site, for example, probably still has "1"
for Inbox and a few other shortcuts. Nice feature.

I'm focused on "browser" because you said "WAP phones" ... a phrase
that doesn't have a good definition. It's akin to saying a "HTTP
computer". As a result, the above assumes you are talking about
"feature-phone browsers".

For java and other platforms where you have more control,
recommendations change a little bit.

~~~~~
Barbara Ballard
Skype: barbara_ballard
Twitter, Delicious: barbaraballard
email: barbara at littlespringsdesign.com
1.785.838.3003

Syndicate content Get the feed