EPA Victoria - Case study in responsive design

1,609 views

Published on

Presented by EPA Victoria: Daniel McLeod, Program Leader Digital, Marketing & Communications Unit, with Tim Kotsiakos, Executive Creative Director at Reactive Media. Presentations to the Victoria Online Seminar Series, Thursday 22 November 2012.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,609
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
626
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

EPA Victoria - Case study in responsive design

  1. 1. INTRO WHAT ISRESPONSIVEWEB DESIGN?
  2. 2. THE WEB RIGHT NOW 16.2 million mobile handset subscribers in Australia an increase of 7% from 15.2million subscribers at the end of December 2011 * Australian Bureau of Statistics
  3. 3. THE WEB RIGHT NOW6,610 Terabytes downloaded during three months ending June 2012 an increase of 32% from the three months ended 31 December 2011 * Australian Bureau of Statistics
  4. 4. THE WEB RIGHT NOWAs many as 31% of users usetheir mobile as their primarymeans to access the internet (United States stat)
  5. 5. DIFFERENT RESOLUTIONS & FORMATS
  6. 6. TWO APPROACHES, EXPLAINEDSeparate Mobile site: Responsive design• Mobile & desktop experiences are • User experience is based on the same treated completely differently foundation• The Web site detects the devices and • The site detects the screen resolution diverts the user to the appropriate site and adjusts the interface accordingly• Typically the mobile site has fewer • Content is the same across desktop & functions and content mobile
  7. 7. CONSIDERATIONSSeparate Mobile site: Responsive design:• Good for dedicated experiences • May impact production costs• URL’s will be different • One URL is good for SEO (Googles• Page load can be better optimized for preferred approach, although they the device support separate sites too)• Users may not expect a completely • Easy to maintain (one single version of different experience the site) • Mitigate against future devices • Guarantee to fit on the users screen • Resizing graphics could be problematic • Compatibility issues with HTML5 & CSS3 • Responsiveness can be compromised
  8. 8. CASE STUDY EPAVICTORIA www.epa.vic.gov.au
  9. 9. WHY SHOULD EPA BE RESPONSIVE?Mobile traffic growing from around 5% a year to 10% (and increasing) Plan for the future
  10. 10. WHY EPA AND NOT THE BEACH REPORT? 53% mobile 10% mobiletraffic during traffic summer
  11. 11. WHY EPA AND NOT THE BEACH REPORT? Main EPA site gets less mobile traffic and has less of a specific purposeResponsive design allowed EPA tosupport mobile whilst catering to all audiences and needs
  12. 12. DEMONSTRATION
  13. 13. GENERAL TRAFFIC RESULTS* 11% increase in visits and24% increase in page views in the 3 months after launch compared to the 3 months before launch * Please note that these are approximations
  14. 14. MOBILE TRAFFIC RESULTS* 10% mobile traffic 1st Aug – 31st Oct 2012(compared to 5.6% mobile traffic during 1st Aug – 31st Oct 2011) * Please note that these are approximations
  15. 15. ...AND MOST IMPORTANTLYExternal feedback has been overwhelmingly positive
  16. 16. SOME LEARNINGS• Content can be tricky e.g complex tables• Legacy apps - Think about how to integrate non-responsive apps/microsites• Page and image sizes• Order of item layout at various sizes - requires thought• Hard to explain to people without showing them (having responsive wireframes developed was useful as an internal sales tool)• Content creators need to update their thinking to consider mobile (the responsive design framework isnt going to solve this) - still working on this one
  17. 17. END OF CASE STUDYTHANKS www.reactive.com

×