...
1) Time-budget centered design
Interface assumes that the user only knows how much time they have and which days they are able to use for a visit.
In an effort to shield the user from the daunting task of the astronomically large amount of possible time arrangements, the user only selects three things (a) which day to visit on (b) how much time they have for the visit (c) which things available that day they want to see.
The screen starts out with only 7 cells, one per day, with small icons inside. The icons are not meant to show specifically what is available that day, but to give the user an idea regarding how much is available that day. If the user wants to plan for a future date, or just buy tickets for it, he can. However, this design does not favor that, as we think that due to constant reconstruction, rescheduling, moving, etc. the staff only have a good idea of the upcoming week.
After a day is clicked, icons for all animals, sessions, and exhibitions appear. These don't have words; only pictures. If one is clicked, more information is shown, along with an option to 'checkmark' this item.
Once the user has marked the icons he is interested in visiting, a set of instructions similar to those obtained from Google Maps upon clicking 'Get Directions'. These specifically tell the user when to arrive, when to go where, how to move around the building using visible landmarks (turn right once you see the round shark tank).
Finally, icons for the following options are shown below: (a) Print the plan (b) Email yourself the plan (c) Buy tickets for this date.
Notes: Finding visual landmarks might be too difficult. The interface should let the user know if he choose too many items to see for his time-budget somehow. A very strong idea that came up while we presented these was that distance and estimated walking time should be incorporated into the schedules.
1) Exploration-centered design
1) Explicit scheduling
...