Over the last month, we have had several meetings in which we had to take some important decisions concerning both the interface and the internal architecture of the app.
During the last meetings, we realised that the number of functionalities to be included in the app was increasing sharply, which could have a negative impact in the usability of the app. Additionally, we would like to keep the interface as user-friendly as possible and not fill the small screen of the smartphone with too much information. However, we also wanted to offer the user the possibility to customize his search as much as possible. This led us to introduce two different modes to use the app, a basic mode and an advanced mode. While the first will work in an implicit and simple way, the latter will allow the user to customize the search formula in order to obtain a certain kind of results. Some of the possible options that we talked about are:
- Select a particular set of keywords.
- Decide the language of the keywords.
- Choose between including the full name of a language (e.g. German/Deutsche) or the code (e.g. de).
Regarding the interface, we also discussed what options should the user have once the results are presented. Although we still have to decide whether the link will be opened by creating a new tab within the app or by launching the default browser, we already came up with some ideas that we wish to include in the results screen:
- Order results by a property (date, star-ranking…)
- E-mail results
- History of results
- Download results (?)
As regards the internal architecture, our testers reported back on the keywords and search engines (results available in the wiki, at the bottom!). All tests seem to confirm that the most suitable set of keywords is group 2: dictionary, glossary, thesaurus. In all cases, the least useful was group 3: term bank, term base, word bank, wordlist. As for the search engines, according to the testers, Bing and DuckDuckGo did not return appropriate results, so Google remains the best option.
A table of languages has been automatically generated by means of a tool that used Google Translator to perform a great number of consecutive translations (63×63 = 3.969 translations o.0). Additionally, it contains the translation of the keywords that will be included in the search formula. A Google doc has been created so that anyone can revise the spelling of the words (please do!). This will save us some time and will also allow us to include languages that could not have been covered otherwise.
Next year we will have to go into more detail in order to define more precisely the workflow and send our plan to the IT department. Let’s do it!