19 ms·

I was using the job search[1] on the gov.uk domain yesterday, and the UX is extremely poor! If the job site was a for-profit, it would probably be put out of b

by forloop 12y ago

I was using the job search[1] on the gov.uk domain yesterday, and the UX is extremely poor! If the job site was a for-profit, it would probably be put out of business by competitors! But, since the government can jail people for not handing over their resources, products aren't held accountable by the Market (big 'M'). I wouldn't even mind if it had an API[2], so I could make a more useful tool[3]. But instead I have to manually go through a ton of jobs each day so I can get unemployment handouts from daddy government (if there was no such thing as VAT, I probably wouldn't need these! Anyway). Gov.uk looks a bit nice with its san serif typeface[4] and minimalist design; but it's varnish on a clunky turd. --- [1] https://www.gov.uk/jobsearch https://www.gov.uk/jobsearch [2] I couldn't find one yesterday. I'm going to have another look. [3] Currently learning Python and looking for a little side project. [4] Looking at the CSS, the particular font is 'nta'—and is presumably custom.

CatsoCatsoCatso 12y ago
The custom font is most likely New Transport or a modification of it. It's a variant of the typeface used on British road signs. https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2014/03/05/new-transport-for-gov-uk/ https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2014/03/05/new-transport-for-gov-uk/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_%28typeface%29#New_Transport http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_%28typeface%29#New_Tr... They're using it for its aesthetic and for its keeping with the national infrastructure.
- forloop 12y ago
  It's almost certainly a modification, if it is New Transport. After all, what makes a road sign readable is different from body copy. But that's an interesting comment! Aside: I've probably been past the road sign on that Wikipedia page.
  - CatsoCatsoCatso 12y ago
    "what makes a road sign readable is different from body copy" I thought the very same, seems a odd choice to me. Interesting that they're using it though. It would be wonderful for them to provide more information about it as the current pickings are very slim.
    - vertex-four 12y ago
      They've provided a bit more information on how they chose it here: https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2012/07/05/a-few-notes-on-typography/ https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2012/07/05/a-few-notes-on-typography...
octo_t 12y ago
This reads like a tea party post from about 2007.
- forloop 12y ago
  Not really. Defensible facts.
jon-wood 12y ago
To be fair to the gov.uk team, Universal Job Search appears not to be run by them. They have a form on gov.uk which submits to the job search application from direct.gov (the organisation that was bad enough to convince government to give gov.uk a go in the first place).
- forloop 12y ago
  > They have a form on gov.uk which submits to the job search application from direct.gov (the organisation that was bad enough to convince government to give gov.uk a go in the first place). That validates my concern about quality.
  - vertex-four 12y ago
    Would you prefer that gov.uk didn't give you any way to access Universal Jobmatch at all? It's a legacy system that people still need to access. I assume the Job Centre have contracts that they need to fulfil that would prevent gov.uk from replacing it.
    - forloop 12y ago
      The marginal benefit—above and beyond other options—of Universal Jobmatch is so low (and probably negative) that it doesn't matter either way. Being mandated to use a suboptimal tool results in a net loss. Taking that into consideration, my answer is 'yes! Please'.
      - vertex-four 12y ago
        You would be mandated to use it whether or not gov.uk linked to it. gov.uk isn't in control of that - the DWP is. Maybe, once the DWP's contract with Monster expires in a few years, gov.uk will be able to make a case that they should be running it.
        forloop 12y ago
        So your question relates to whether it makes a difference to me if the job search app is available via gov.uk? No it doesn't. From the outside it's all bullshit branding. As a user I want to be able to find jobs, refine searches, use categories, and other activities based around getting-the-job-done. Edit: URLs for unique resources works fine. The gov.uk as a namespace doesn't help usability. I'm happy to be corrected with evidence.
JimmehAH 12y ago
Universal Jobmatch is built and maintained by the for-profit private firm Monster, not the gov.uk team.
- forloop 12y ago
  The Monster.co.uk main site is better. They still aren't held accountable to the market. Being for-profit per se is the wrong distinction! Free market may be more apt. That explains why there's so many jobs from Monster on there.
  - JimmehAH 12y ago
    I agree that it's terrible and that its use is mandatory only compounds its failures.

by forloop 12y ago

CatsoCatsoCatso 12y ago

The custom font is most likely New Transport or a modification of it. It's a variant of the typeface used on British road signs. https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2014/03/05/new-transport-for-gov-uk/ https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2014/03/05/new-transport-for-gov-uk/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_%28typeface%29#New_Transport http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_%28typeface%29#New_Tr... They're using it for its aesthetic and for its keeping with the national infrastructure.

forloop 12y ago
It's almost certainly a modification, if it is New Transport. After all, what makes a road sign readable is different from body copy. But that's an interesting comment! Aside: I've probably been past the road sign on that Wikipedia page.
- CatsoCatsoCatso 12y ago
  "what makes a road sign readable is different from body copy" I thought the very same, seems a odd choice to me. Interesting that they're using it though. It would be wonderful for them to provide more information about it as the current pickings are very slim.
  - vertex-four 12y ago
    They've provided a bit more information on how they chose it here: https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2012/07/05/a-few-notes-on-typography/ https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2012/07/05/a-few-notes-on-typography...

octo_t 12y ago

This reads like a tea party post from about 2007.

forloop 12y ago
Not really. Defensible facts.

jon-wood 12y ago

To be fair to the gov.uk team, Universal Job Search appears not to be run by them. They have a form on gov.uk which submits to the job search application from direct.gov (the organisation that was bad enough to convince government to give gov.uk a go in the first place).

forloop 12y ago
> They have a form on gov.uk which submits to the job search application from direct.gov (the organisation that was bad enough to convince government to give gov.uk a go in the first place). That validates my concern about quality.
- vertex-four 12y ago
  Would you prefer that gov.uk didn't give you any way to access Universal Jobmatch at all? It's a legacy system that people still need to access. I assume the Job Centre have contracts that they need to fulfil that would prevent gov.uk from replacing it.
  - forloop 12y ago
    The marginal benefit—above and beyond other options—of Universal Jobmatch is so low (and probably negative) that it doesn't matter either way. Being mandated to use a suboptimal tool results in a net loss. Taking that into consideration, my answer is 'yes! Please'.
    - vertex-four 12y ago
      You would be mandated to use it whether or not gov.uk linked to it. gov.uk isn't in control of that - the DWP is. Maybe, once the DWP's contract with Monster expires in a few years, gov.uk will be able to make a case that they should be running it.
      - forloop 12y ago
        So your question relates to whether it makes a difference to me if the job search app is available via gov.uk? No it doesn't. From the outside it's all bullshit branding. As a user I want to be able to find jobs, refine searches, use categories, and other activities based around getting-the-job-done. Edit: URLs for unique resources works fine. The gov.uk as a namespace doesn't help usability. I'm happy to be corrected with evidence.

JimmehAH 12y ago

Universal Jobmatch is built and maintained by the for-profit private firm Monster, not the gov.uk team.

forloop 12y ago
The Monster.co.uk main site is better. They still aren't held accountable to the market. Being for-profit per se is the wrong distinction! Free market may be more apt. That explains why there's so many jobs from Monster on there.
- JimmehAH 12y ago
  I agree that it's terrible and that its use is mandatory only compounds its failures.