Also, it's been featured here before, but it's worth adding that I love how visible they've made their design principles[2].
[0]: https://www.gov.uk/vat-rates
[1]: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/Taxes/Beginn...
Also, it's been featured here before, but it's worth adding that I love how visible they've made their design principles[2].
[0]: https://www.gov.uk/vat-rates
[1]: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/Taxes/Beginn...
It doesn't lack detail. It just lacks unnecessary detail.
>why not spend money making a new one and show how we've made all government services go online in a web2.0 fashion
Uhm, gov.uk is a response to a report suggesting "Revolution not Evolution", among other things. It is not being done because the government wants to leave its mark, it's because Directgov is horrible.
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/directgov-2...
* If I'm a business how do I get my VAT right?
* What goods/services are VAT exempt
Now they're a little specific because I deal with VAT regularly but the fact that the VAT rate is 20% is easy to show and it's a headline piece of information. However tax and everything else involving government is always complicated and presenting it simply is incredibly difficult. The questions that a user landing on that page will want answering are diverse and as much as I'd like it to be as simple as showing a simple table with some data I doubt whether that's going to answer the question the average user has. The current directgov page is full of links to and information that might help, the new snazzy page - nope nothing.
I don't think this is purely political I honestly believe there are people trying to make government sites more simple but I also don't think just throwing away whatever information you don't need is not particularly helpful. The reason most gov websites are hugely complicated/confusing is because gov is hugely confusing/complicated and while I applaud any effort to simplify the presentation simply dropping a bunch of information and claiming you've solved the problem doesn't cut it.