On 01/06/2004, at 11:26 AM, Andreas Boehmer wrote:
I was wondering whether you could give me some feedback on a website we have
created: http://www.jet.org.au.
We have tried to make it as accessible as possible, but better than any
Bobby or W3C validation is probably going through your critique. We are
still working on improving it, but please feel free to be tough critics!
From a quick glance, without looking at any code or styles...
- the small type in the logo is virtually impossible to read (1280x1024 17" flat panel)... either you want people to read the text (so make it bigger), or you don't (so get rid of it). I know it's not a TRUE accessibility issue, but since there are validators for those (which you should use), I don't need to go into all that here :)
- Link colours in the breadcrumbs, and on the homepage (for starters, eg "Login Now!") don't have a visited link state -- I bet there are a lot more examples all over the site.
- some of the font sizes (especially in the left navigation bar) are pretty small (around 9px I guess?) in Safari -- whilst I haven't bothered to see how you've styled them, it's certainly something to watch out for across all browsers with a default font set small-ish.
These comments shouldn't detract from what is looking like quite a nice site. In other words, you're getting there for sure!
--- Justin French http://indent.com.au
*****************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*****************************************************
