While working on the analysis of the two sites that I was assigned to facilitate in class, I chance upon an interesting online art magazine that presents an article on the top 10 museum web sites, exploring what might make online design the next starchitecture:
http://www.blouinartinfo.com/news/story/804985/artinfo-ranks-the-top-10-best-museum-web-sites-from-the
After a quick scan through the list of top 10 websites, I realized it is not easy to decipher the characteristics of a good website as the design and functionality for each site varies. The styles are diverse. The one common feature across all sites is the Web 2.0 functionality, a basic in today's website.
One comment in the article struck me as we had some brief discussion about this in one of our class discussion earlier:
Just because a museum is famous doesn't mean its Web site is great — the Museum of Modern Art is one such negative example.
Understandably, while maintaining a 'cool' site is probably a necessary part of museum branding, it may not be the priority of all museums. But I wonder why is the Museum of Modern Art quoted as a negative example.
No comments:
Post a Comment