I dig this site but agree with Jamie on the sIFR comment.
The images are totally unnecessary and have some leading issues.
I’m a big fan of large text for headers, so I like to see that.
From a usability standpoint I’d like to see consistency in link colors and/or treatment. In the body copy there are bolded words that are bolded because they are links and ALSO some are bolded to add emphasis. It’s not consistent. I just feel it’s good practice to always be mindful of implementing consistent link colors.
Those are kind of nit-picky though.
The biggest issue is why the site fails validation. Not having alt tags on images is pretty lame. A very simple fix though.
I really like the large background. I don’t like that they used images for their header text, bad for SEO. So I pretty much just agree with what everyone else has said so far, should’ve went with the sIFR.
4 Comments
Love the layout.
Would have liked to see the use of sIFR.
Yeah, I agree with Jamie. This is clean and nicely laid out. sIFR would have been an excellent choice for typography.
I dig this site but agree with Jamie on the sIFR comment.
The images are totally unnecessary and have some leading issues.
I’m a big fan of large text for headers, so I like to see that.
From a usability standpoint I’d like to see consistency in link colors and/or treatment. In the body copy there are bolded words that are bolded because they are links and ALSO some are bolded to add emphasis. It’s not consistent. I just feel it’s good practice to always be mindful of implementing consistent link colors.
Those are kind of nit-picky though.
The biggest issue is why the site fails validation. Not having alt tags on images is pretty lame. A very simple fix though.
Very nice, simple, clean layout.
I really like the large background. I don’t like that they used images for their header text, bad for SEO. So I pretty much just agree with what everyone else has said so far, should’ve went with the sIFR.