Review my site.

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.

View the original article here