critique these sites please

[Developwebsites]

http://www.siggraph.org

 

[WebcastMaker]

http://www.siggraph.org

For the most part I like it, but...

Run it through the validator and fix the few errors you have. Nothing
serious, and easy to fix.

I don't like pages that have multiple columns that by the bottom of the
page there is only 1 thin column with content.

Why is the menu on every page BUT the helpdesk?

 

[The Doormouse]

http://www.siggraph.org

It does not validate.

Would you like a critique of the design? That sucks, too.

The Doormouse

 

[Neal]

http://www.siggraph.org

"These sites" implies more than one. This is one site.

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.siggraph.org/

7 errors.

1) script requires type attribute.

2) link element must go in body.

3) table does not take attribute height

4, 7) img requires attribute alt

5) tr cannot take attribute height

6) some unallowed characters in there - looks like maybe a long dash
character.

 

[Karl Groves]

http://www.siggraph.org

Above & beyond the HTML issues mentioned by others, this thing is in serious
trouble from an Information Architecture & navigation standpoint.
The front page is just vomitting links on your user's screen and the rest of
the site isn't much better.

-Karl

 

[nice.guy.nige]

While the city slept, Developwebsites ([email protected])
feverishly typed...

http://www.siggraph.org

Quite nice. Crisp design. Good use of colour. However...

It would be nice on the home page to start off with a short description of
who and what the organisation is.
There seem to be too many links to articles down the right hand side. Maybe
a short list of the latest news items, followed by a link to "more news"?
The top menu bar is just white text on a dark blue background, so why not
use ordinary text for this instead of images? Will load quicker, and the
text can then be resized.
As others have said, fix your HTML errors.

Other than that, like I said, a quite nice and crisp design.

Cheers,
Nige

 

[mark | r]

add line spacing its way too bunched up, also use a bullet point or
somethgin on the side meny to separate the items

all the internal pages differ in design?

 

[rf]

add line spacing its way too bunched up, also use a bullet point or
somethgin on the side meny to separate the items

Er, are you replying to somebody?

<checks rest of thread>
Oh I see.

Well I don't agree. The line spacing is at its default, as it should be. If
you don't like it then construct yourself a user style sheet.

all the internal pages differ in design?

True, confusing.

 

[Barefoot Kid]

: http://www.siggraph.org

info overload on front page but saying the visitor has no idea wot the site
is about, for an organisation devoted to computer graphics the design(???)
is very dull

 

[Developwebsites]

Run it through the validator and fix the few errors you have.

I didnt create this site, just asking what your opinion of it is.
It's like if I ask you to critique a movie, that doesnt mean I made it, right?

 

[WebcastMaker]

I didnt create this site, just asking what your opinion of it is.
It's like if I ask you to critique a movie, that doesnt mean I made it, right?

and you wasted our time because....

 

[Neal]

I didnt create this site, just asking what your opinion of it is.
It's like if I ask you to critique a movie, that doesnt mean I made it,
right?

For me to effectively critique it, the errors must be fixed. If you cannot
fix the errors, it's more difficult to critique. So not a terribly useful
exercise, I'm afraid.

Why is it you want it critiqued?

 

[nice.guy.nige]

While the city slept, Developwebsites ([email protected])
feverishly typed...

I didnt create this site, just asking what your opinion of it is.
It's like if I ask you to critique a movie, that doesnt mean I made
it, right?

Erm... in actual fact you asked no such thing. Sure, there was a question in
your subject line, but not in the body of your message.

And, if you ask for a critique of a website, it will usually be inferred
that you created it. That is the common situation in here.

Why did you want a critique of someone else's site? It would have been
useful if you had made this point in your original post.

Cheers,
Nige

 

[Jeffrey Silverman]

http://www.siggraph.org

It would be nice if you actually included some content in the body of your
message/newsgroup posting rather than the rather cryptic one line.

Subject? Oh, I see. You have a subject line that explains what you want.
Well, you know, that is a pretty un-useful way to post to a newsgroup.

 

[Sam Hughes]

It would be nice if you actually included some content in the body of
your message/newsgroup posting rather than the rather cryptic one
line.

Subject? Oh, I see.

Wha? Who said subject? Are you hearing voices? ;-)

 

[marcus]

http://www.siggraph.org

The lack of common "look and feel" is very disconcerting.

For example, these pages:

http://www.siggraph.org/
(navigation bar along top and side menu)

http://www.siggraph.org/membership/#AccessingProceedings
(navigation bar along top and side menu plus links within page)

http://www.siggraph.org/cgi-bin/helpdesk
(no navigation bar)

http://www.siggraph.org/gen-info/strategic_planning/index.html
(no navigation bar)

http://www.siggraph.org/calendar/
(no navigation bar)

It's difficult to feel like you are on the same site.

Please standardise the menus and navigation throughout the site.

regards
Marcus