Relevant extensions were difficult to surface.
Users could search a large directory, but relevance, terminology, and filtering made the right option harder to identify.
← IndexCase 02 / 05
Joomla Extension Directory.
Information architecture and search strategy redesign for a global open-source software marketplace.
01 / 05Overview
The project in 30 seconds
The problem
Users could access thousands of extensions, but finding, comparing, and confidently selecting the right one required too much effort.
What I did
I researched the discovery journey, evaluated search and information architecture, and connected those findings to a practical redesign strategy.
The direction
Treat the directory as a decision-support experience built around intent, structured metadata, and comparison — not just a list of extensions.
Role
Sole UX Researcher & Information Architect
Duration
12 weeks
Methods
Interviews, surveys, heuristic evaluation, competitive analysis
Tools
Figma, Miro, Google Forms, Cacoo
02 / 05Discover
The challenge
Finding extensions wasn't the problem. Finding the right one was.
Reduce search friction, surface compatibility, and rebuild the path from discovery to confident selection inside a long-running open-source ecosystem.
The JED hosts thousands of extensions across e-commerce, forms, security, SEO, and more. Users routinely invested significant time only to choose extensions that didn't fit their needs.
Research findingsWhat discovery revealed
The information needed to decide was scattered.
Compatibility and key differences were not always visible at the moment users needed to compare alternatives.
A result was not the same as a confident decision.
About 65% of survey respondents reported choosing an extension that ultimately failed to meet their needs after significant effort.
03 / 05Define
Connecting the dots
Different search language
Inconsistent metadata
Scattered compatibility details
Search wasn't the real problem. The gap sat between user intent and how information was structured.
Intent-aware discovery
Structured metadata
Decision support
04 / 05Design
The solution direction
A directory that helps people decide, not just browse.
The recommendations work as a system: improve the information entering the directory, use that structure to sharpen discovery, and make alternatives easier to evaluate before users commit time to implementation.
Build a stronger information foundation
Standardized metadata and a guided submission wizard give search, filtering, and comparison more consistent information to work with.
Make discovery more relevant
Intent-aware ranking, clearer filters, and transparent match explanations help users understand why an extension appears.
Support confident evaluation
Comparable cards, compatibility details, maintenance signals, and side-by-side comparison reduce guesswork before selection.
Solution visual 01 / 08
05 / 05Next
Expected impact & next validation
Designed to improve
Discoverability
Search clarity
Compatibility awareness
Decision confidence
What I'd validate next
Test whether users find suitable extensions faster, understand why results match, compare alternatives with less recall effort, and avoid unsuitable selections earlier.
Because this was a design recommendation project rather than a launched product, these are intended outcomes—not manufactured performance metrics.
Reflection
Search isn't about retrieving results — it's about helping people decide. The information was there; it just wasn't legible, comparable, or trustworthy.
This project demonstrates
Systems ThinkingResearch SynthesisInformation ArchitectureSearch StrategyUX ResearchDesigning Within Constraints
Next case — 03Continue →
Robin.
A client-driven product/design project focused on understanding an existing job-search workflow, stakeholder/client requirements, application organization, resume management, interviews, contacts, and iterative UX validation.