Re: http://www.gordonellis.net/

Hello Craig,

Did not look over the text - many members out there are native English
speaking people ;-) - just a few remarks:

Some of the header images lack alt texts ("Daily Living Aids"), some show
wrong texts ("Bath Aids" for "Bariatric Aids").
IMHO, the text links mouseover color should be a bit darker on the white
background.
>From the point of accessibility, it's not sufficient to give only an alt
text of "description" (a typo is there) for the image showing "All Bariatric
commodes are extra wide...".

The index page layering worked very well - no problems.

Had no time to look with Netscape but know the many CSS problems of the
Navigator...

Overall, a very clear, informational and visually pleasing site!

IE 5.0, WIN 98, PII 350, 256 MB
21", 32-bit colors, 1280x1024
Cookies: off
Javascript: on
ActiveX etc.: on request

Gerhard Sch�ning
webmaster(at)schoening-online.de

Web Design for Universal Accessibility
http://www.schoening-online.de/

----- Original Message -----
From: Craig T. Harding <info(at)guidenet.net>
To: HWG Critique List <hwg-critique(at)hwg.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 9:27 PM
Subject: http://www.gordonellis.net/


> Hello, fellow members. I'm bringing a site from Alpha to Beta stage and
> need to have you all take a look and let me know about it. I just loaded
> it to its domain, though I'm not publicizing it until it's done. I
> particularly need to know your platform and browser as well as screen
> resolution and color depth if you see something really strange going on.
>
> Site URI: http://www.gordonellis.net/
>
> Known Issues:
> 1. The site is designed for 800x600 or higher resolution. I decided to
> go this way about 2 months ago when my servers started reporting under 3
> percent using lessor resolution, so I know the site doesn't degrade.
>
> 2. Spelling and grammar have not been final proofed. The client reserved
> this right as some of the text refers specifically to his industry.
>
> 3. The front page layers are not complete. I intend to add additional
> imaging when I'm certain the layers position properly.
>
> I'm particularly interested in the index page layering. It all works
> properly on both my Macs and my Windows machines, but a colleage claimed
> it was all over the place on his PPC Linux box. I need to know if people
> here see it right.
>
> I'm also interested in the linked CSS. It's hard to get Netscape to
> render CSS anywhere close to W3C standards even when the page validates
> as these probably do. Does the text look ok? Is anything totally ugly?
> ... trite expressions?  ... dumb sounding text?
>
> Thank you in advance for any help you might render.
>
> --
> Craig T. Harding
>

HTML: hwg-critique mailing list archives, maintained by Webmaster @ IWA