Hey, I recently built a site for a client and I'd like you to take a look at it for me. Please comment on the Design, Code and Layout, it'd be useful to have some feedback. Link: http://ignite-radio.com/ ~Jam
Too purple. Hurts my eyes to look at. Immediately left because of that, didn't even care about the content.
You can move your title more upward in the purple and change the font color to white so it's more readable.
The black text on purple is effectively illegible for probably around 20% the population, and headache inducing for far, far more than that. You can do the math on that -- with the emissive formula (0.3*R + 0.59*G + 0.11*B) the dark purple used up top and in the footer is only 84 luminance on a scale of 0..255, far short of the 128 (50%) minimum contrast, and way short of the 70% ideal. Even the lighter purple on that oddball poorly placed menu section only works out to 154L, which given the text is only 17L (not pure black) that's only 137 -- right up against the minimum and again far short of the ideal. Things like this are in the WCAG, the EGA/VGA specifications, the joint Apple/IBM/Microsoft interface guidelines from 25 years ago, etc, etc... The interface is completely broken on large font systems, most likely from using dynamic fonts over pixel sized elements in a fixed width layout. If you're going to use %/em, you need to learn to use them PROPERLY -- or else the result is more broken than if you hadn't bothered. ... and I don't know what goof assed webfont that is, but swing an axe at that usability atrocity as well given how mangled and poorly formed the glyphs are under windows. "Asap" -- yeah, once you see what that renders like on cleartype you'd have to be a-sap to try and use it. (Kind of like okra, described in the dictionary as a "hard shelled green vegetable filled with a glutinous sap -- you'd have to be a gluttonous sap to eat that rancid swill) While it's nice to see an ATTEMPT at responsive layout, about the only layout not broken here is the narrowest one. That needs some work too... ... and of course it has the prerequisite scripting for nothing garbage. Oh wait, is there supposed to be a image rotator in there? Odd, it's not actually showing up here. Code-wise, you at least TRIED to use headings properly, but I'm not sure the text after the h1 is actually separate from the h1 or warrants a paragraph, it's very DIV heavy when there's perfectly good block level containers inside the DIV, you've got presentational images in the markup (the logo for example), you're using 'embed' which is the wrong tag for plugin content any time after 1997 -- the same can be said of the IFRAME doing OBJECT's job... though a the code proudly proclaims on the first line with the tranny doctype that the code is in transition from 1997 to 1998 coding practices... further borne out by the presence of the language and border attributes. Needs some work.
Are you talking about the title? I'm probably going to change the vertical align so the H1 will fall on the purple, and the slogan on the white. Colour change probably required, yeah. Otherwise the rest of the text is black on white. Can't see where that's happening - The only problem I can see is the Listen Live dialogue extends past the container on high zoom levels, so I'll take a look at that. Thanks for the alert, will most likely change. Please show me where - The layout seems constant to me when the size of the webpage is changed. Only thing I can see that works badly is the aforementioned Listen Live box. Scripting for nothing? Where? One code is for the slider, and another for the Popup Player, I don't see how that's for nothing. If you can suggest an alternate way of doing things then I'd be happy to hear them, I looked for a while looking for a non JS way of creating a popup. What's wrong with the slider? Does it not display the first image with scripting off, it should be, I'll look into that. DIV heavy, I'll agree to that but the client insisted on the colors and background stripe (If you're referring to the slider DIV's) . Logo will be changed to a background attribute. The IFRAME leads from the Facebook integration, which didn't exactly have much other choices for implementation, I will look into changing that. Doctype will be changed to XHTML Strict in a bit as well. Thanks for your review, helped me anyway.
H1, the somewhat lighter colored menu buttons, and the footer. and http://www.cutcodedown.com/for_others/jamjar919/120dpi.jpg that's withot zoom -- and it's caused by your using %/EM inside PX metric containers or over px metric images. Are you aware of what large fonts/120dpi means? Automatically enlarging the text in ALL applications? (in theory including browserS) without rescaling anything else? It's the entire reason the WCAG says to use %/em, and why slapping images behind things like menu buttons is probably not all that great an idea when CSS3 can look as good, if not better. I say that the moment that fat bloated steaming pile of idiotic BS known as jquery is in the mix... though you're loading six separate script files totalling 174k -- for what? Some broken "popup player that set off warnings from AVAST and seems to be blocked by Opera's in-built anti-malware, that doesn't even look like it should be using scripting since there's an EMBED in the markup? As to a slider, what slider? That too seems to be broken -- and if that is indeed some form of image rotating script, there are ones that work without the jquery BS that are smaller than the script you're including. (the trick being to let CSS do the gruntwork instead of jquery) Popups don't belong on websites anymore -- did we learn NOTHING from the 1990's?!? If you mean the image next to the horiffically broken menu-type thing, it's not rotating in Opera or FF, it's not even showing up in any version of IE... in fact the only browser the page even seems to try to want to work in here is Chrome!