1. No over states yet, but there are up states (aside from some technical issue). the orange upstate may be an issue when other elements that are the same color all the time, like Articles. There may be a need to bring in a different color that is reserved just for up states.
2. Main categories placement, and the placement of subcategories below, are clear and fairly intuitive.
3. Yes multiple entry points, through the a-z nav and search. Maybe there are other opportunities for navigation within body text as hyperlinks.
4. Yes, easy to read, looks good pretty much everywhere
5. Yes , section headings are clear, pages are conformable to read and fairly scannable. But, although not a legibility issue, I do think some differences in leading in certain situations would improve scanning by better grouping of like elements.
The leading above and below each header looks too similar, where as headers seem to float in between two body texts and aren't grouped enough with their corresponding text.
6. Treatment of headings on term pages are different (outdented), which is definitely appropriate, but maybe a different treatment to further separate terms from other subheadings on other pages, since they are a different type of information. Maybe a new color.
7. Aside from the resolution problem(designed at 1440 x 900), size looks good and has accounted for space outside, although it seem like the "brick borders" should move with the browser chrome. Maybe this is just a technical issue that hasn't been worked out yet.
8. Yes, but maybe article pages could be more significantly different from Designers role and others, letting you know immediately that it is a different type of content.
1 comment:
1. No over states yet, but there are up states (aside from some technical issue). the orange upstate may be an issue when other elements that are the same color all the time, like Articles. There may be a need to bring in a different color that is reserved just for up states.
2. Main categories placement, and the placement of subcategories below, are clear and fairly intuitive.
3. Yes multiple entry points, through the a-z nav and search. Maybe there are other opportunities for navigation within body text as hyperlinks.
4. Yes, easy to read, looks good pretty much everywhere
5. Yes , section headings are clear, pages are conformable to read and fairly scannable. But, although not a legibility issue, I do think some differences in leading in certain situations would improve scanning by better grouping of like elements.
The leading above and below each header looks too similar, where as headers seem to float in between two body texts and aren't grouped enough with their corresponding text.
6. Treatment of headings on term pages are different (outdented), which is definitely appropriate, but maybe a different treatment to further separate terms from other subheadings on other pages, since they are a different type of information. Maybe a new color.
7. Aside from the resolution problem(designed at 1440 x 900), size looks good and has accounted for space outside, although it seem like the "brick borders" should move with the browser chrome. Maybe this is just a technical issue that hasn't been worked out yet.
8. Yes, but maybe article pages could be more significantly different from Designers role and others, letting you know immediately that it is a different type of content.
Post a Comment