6780 Website Evaluations Final

Views:
 
Category: Entertainment
     
 

Presentation Description

No description available.

Comments

Presentation Transcript

Website Evaluations:

Website Evaluations A Summary by: Cohesive Consultants Jim Gordon, Kathi Myers, Tish Stewart EDUI 6780 Group Project

Cohesive Consultants Introduction:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Cohesive Consultants Introduction Cohesive Consultants is a team dedicated to ensuring web content offers a rewarding experience for users. This report offers our teams thoughts on the usability, readability, and accessibility of three different websites, and our summary is broken down into simple, easy to understand bullet points of pro’s and cons for each site.

Table of Contents:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Table of Contents Web Content Guidelines What We Looked For… Usability Readability Accessibility Site Evaluations Fedex Office Chipotle Lesailes References Conclusion

Usability:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Describes how well a user can interact with the website: Navigation controls Search functions Organization Simplicity User Friendly

Readability:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Readability DEFINITION OF READABILITY “Readability is the degree to which ideas can be understood, based on the complexity of words and sentences” Butler, J., Holden, K., & Lidwell , W. (2003).

Readability:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Readability WHAT WE LOOK FOR Fonts Color Chunking Aesthetic Usability Effect Good Continuation Highlighting White Space Clarity and Concise Format – Headings and Subheadings Placement, Size, and Color Consistency – Content and Graphics Background and Contrast Proportion – The “Golden Mean” Balance – Visual (Graphics) and Verbal (Words)

Accessibility:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Accessibility Describes how usable for all users to have equal access to information and functionality with the website. Structuring content Marking-up content

Fedex Office Review:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Fedex Office Review Usability Readability Accessibility Summary

Usability Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Pros Pages load quickly Navigation across the top is descriptive and easy to locate contents Search function works well Customer support area easily found Order tracking works well Includes a user friendly “find a location near you” service Easily accessible “start online order” tab Sitemap at bottom is fairly descriptive and easily accessible

Usability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Cons “Online Ordering” is a bit confusing. When testing the site using a simple Microsoft Word document for online printing, there were a number of categories but none for “basic prints” making online ordering a bit confusing When visiting different pages in the site, there is no “Home” button easily accessible. Instead you must move your cursor around the page to find a “hotspot” (located on the Kinko’s image) to take you “home” Navigation choices are fairly significant, depending on whether you are a “corporate” business or just looking for basic services. Some of the print options do not have a “sample” allowing the user to see different print type content Some web pages you have to scroll to see bottom content Location search only tells you if there are stores within 100 miles of a city or area code, with no way to search on a map otherwise.

Readability Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Readability Pros Good use of color Chunking was appropriate Good Aesthetic Usability Effect Good continuation Clear and concise Good usage of formatting – headings and subheadings Appropriate size and color usage Good background and contrast Proportion meats the “Golden Mean” Good balance of visual and verbal usage Good usage of white space Summary Value Total sentences 358 Total words 1051 Average words per Sentence 2.94 Words with 4 or more Syllables 94 Percentage of word with three or more syllables 22.55% Average Syllables per Word 1.78 Gunning Fog Index 10.19 Flesch Reading Ease 52.93 Flesch-Kincaid Grade 6.61

Readability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Readability Cons Some fonts could be bolder for better readability Poor highlighting Poor placement of information Continuity/flow could be better

Accessibility Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Accessibility Pros Alternate Text on some images Alternate Text on some Links Alerts for some event handlers Alerts for some Pop-up Windows

Accessibility Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Accessibility Cons Wave ( evaluation tool) 16 errors of Accessibility Total Validator 133 errors 3-Parsing 98-HTML 31-WCAG v2 A 54 Warnings 1-Parsing 53-WCAG v2 A Cynthia Says Failed Verification 508 Standards Section 1194.22 Failed Verification Alt Text HTML code instances not valid. Linked images and forms missing codes. Empty Links

Fedex Summary:

From a usability perspective, Fedex Office website offers vast choices to a large customer pool depending upon business or personal needs. The site is organized and fairly easily navigable, with the exception of a “Home” button throughout the pages. The main recommendation would be to include a “basic services” page for customers looking for simple print solutions. From a readability viewpoint, Fedex Office seemed a little better than average. There wasn’t a lot of innovation in their web design to create much interest. The organization and balance of graphics and text was good. I would recommend that the dropdown blinking reminder on the Home page “3” be removed. It was very distracting and annoying to offer a discount code under an isolated number in the top right corner. From an accessibility position, the Fedex Office website would be a challenge for a person using an aid tool to read the screen. There is a lot of missing alternate text which tells the screen reader what the mouse or tab clicks are touching whether it is an image or link. There are also links that do not have a current file and lead the user to an error message. EDUI 6780 Group Project Fedex Summary

Chipotle Review:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Chipotle Review Usability Readability Accessibility Summary

Usability Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Pros Easily accessible navigation banner across the top Site loads easily but takes a little longer due to size of images Search function works well FAQ is laid out well with several easily navigable questions/answers Easily identifiable pages in navigation bar

Usability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Cons On the home page there is a small button on the bottom half of the page with no label. Out of curiosity I moved the mouse over it and found it was a “hot spot”. When clicked, the top half of the page goes up exposing another sort of “home page” with a vast amount of information including where food is grown, and another what looked like video of “Steve Ellis” but provided no description on what it was about and you had to scroll down to even find it. This part of the site left me to question what the true purpose was. Much of the information on the “homepage” could easily be included in navigation on one of the other appropriate site pages. No “Home” navigation tab Not all web pages described or navigable- for instance, located a “Chipotle Videos” through the search function, but the page is not listed in the navigation bar

Usability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Cons Location finder is difficult with no way to search “nearby areas”. For instance, entered a zip code and it simply said there were no locations within 100 miles of my location, but did not offer any other way to search for locations (a map, etc ) Chipotle “Store” opens up in a new window, so if you want to return to the regular site you have to close the window and it simply takes you back to the last page you visited on the restaurant site, instead of simply including the page in it’s own window with a “back” button “Jobs” page does the same thing, takes you to another window with no “back” or “home” button to return you to the main page One navigation labeled “Food with Integrity” doesn’t provide much of a description leaving a customer to wonder why they would click on the page, and

Readability Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Readability Pros No. of characters ( without spaces) : 63,519.00 Number of words : 5,381.00 Number of sentences : 732.00 Average number of characters per word : 11.80 Average number of syllables per word : 3.24 Average number of words per sentence: 7.35 Flesch Kincaid Grade level : 25.52 ARI (Automated Readability Index) : 37.84 Flesch Reading Ease : -74.80

Readability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Readability Cons Poor usage of fonts Drab colors made for poor interest/appeal Chunking was erratic Little continuity Poor Aesthetic Usability Effect Poor clarity and topics not concise Poor formatting – Headings and Subheadings Unpleasing Placement, Size, and Color Lack of Consistency with Content and Graphics Poor Background and Contrast Poor Proportion – “The Golden Mean” Poor Balance – Visual and Words

Accessibility Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Accessibility Pros All images are in a web friendly format. Defining an image size allow the webpage to display layout correctly before loading all of the images. This website is quick to load. On average pages take 1.5 seconds to download and on average individual pages are extremely quick to respond. Website is shared socially. Facebook and Twitter were tested. Every page is using some form of analytics software. Every page was found to use correctly defined headings. This ensures accessibility for search engines and disability readers.

Accessibility Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Accessibility Cons Alternative text is rarely used. 95% of the images do not have alternative test, which means users with visual disabilities will not be able to get a description of the image. Files are missing. There are 7 broken files meaning the link does not produce a picture or file. Not W3C compliance. This test showed the website used XHTML instead of HTML and s ome web browsers may experience some difficulty.

Chipotle Summary:

From a usability perspective, the Chipotle homepage needs to be redesigned for ease of access. Restaurant websites suggest the vast number of visitors look for restaurant locations, menus, operating hours, etc. This information is buried throughout the site and not easily located. The recommendation would be to offer a single home page with basic information for quick access to customers, then provide navigation for the more detailed information. Looking at this website from a readability viewpoint, I would recommend that they start over. Based on the review, there didn’t seem to be much positive to focus. The confusing layout, font usage, unrelated video, and iPhone app, is, unfortunately not within positive readability standards. From the accessibility stance, the Chipotle website would be a challenge for a disabled person trying to use a screen reader. According to two website assessment tools this website failed the 508 standards. There is a lot of missing alternate text which tells the screen reader what the mouse or tab clicks are touching whether it is an image or link. There are also 7 broken links that do not have a current file and lead the user to an error message. EDUI 6780 Group Project Chipotle Summary

Lesailes Review:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Lesailes Review Usability Readability Accessibility Summary

Usability Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Pros Hard to find any… Graphic images were sharp and clear

Usability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Cons Site loads with nothing but a mass of small images with no description on what the site is or a description of what to click on Small navigation box on the upper right only loads more images! Some of the images you click on contain more close-up images, and some contain video with no description on what the site is all about I found a small brown bar to the left with a question mark and found it was a “hot spot”. When hovering, I found several navigation tabs to different pages with only 1 word description such as “leather, silk, surprises, etc ”. When I clicked on “Surprises” another batch of images came up with no description, when I clicked on 1 it took me to some sort of slot machine style of images that offered no rhyme or reason for why it was there

Usability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Cons Some of the images take a significant amount of time to load, depending on whether there are more images to display or video Each one of the areas visited offers NO explanation of what it is or what the site is trying to get across. There is no “back” button, instead you have to search around until you see a very small orange “x” at the top of the page. Clicked on a page in the navigation titled “cultural events” and another site with a number of images came up. Clicked on an image and a small description with a bunch of flying images came up Search function opens up a new page with the home page (full of images) grayed out in the background. The search box is very small, and with no descriptions at all in the web site, I had no idea what to even search for

Usability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Usability Cons Finally found a navigable web page when I clicked on “Store”, however, in the navigation area I tested one area in the “ men’s ” section. When I clicked on it, a picture of a wristwatch came up, though there is a navigation button titled :”Jewelry and Watches”, and when you click on it a picture of 1 watch comes up. Other navigation items in the “storefront” are grayed out on the side and hard to see

Readability Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Readability Pros Summary Value Total sentences 3 Total words 27 Average words per Sentence 9.00 Percentage of word with three or more syllables 18.52% Gunning Fog Index 11.01 Flesch Reading Ease 56.70 Flesch-Kincaid Grade 7.59

Readability Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Readability Cons Very few fonts used No chunking No Aesthetic Usability Effect Poor continuation No highlighting Inappropriate usage of white space Not clear and concise Poor format – Headings and Subheadings Poor placement and size of graphics Poor consistency – little content and too many graphics Poor background and too vivid contrast Inappropriate proportion – “The Golden Mean” Poor balance – graphics and words

Accessibility Pros:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Accessibility Pros Passed 508 Standards Passed Alternate Text with a warning.

Accessibility Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Accessibility Cons This site used the “Meta” element to specify the document-wide default language and it is obsolete. The tags are being used to create a visual presentation and CSS was not used to control layout or presentation, so users and their aids will have difficulty.

Accessibility Cons:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Accessibility Cons Missing Heading and Titles Missing Structure Null and Empty Alternate T ext

Lesailes Summary:

From a usability perspective, it is extremely difficult to quickly identify the product Lesailes offers. The site is buried through vast numbers of graphic images that take significant time to load depending on connection speed. The recommendation would be a complete redesign offering simple navigation and ordering information based on the site visitor profile. Looking at this website and trying to focus on readability concerns, is unimaginable. The usage of so many icons/graphics which indicate nothing, made me want to move on. There was zero appeal and no enticement to dig further into the site to, even, satisfy curiosity. Without knowing what the company sells, I would never know by anything showing when I opened the website link. The Lesailes website passed the 508 standards in spite of the fact that CSS was not used which can present potential challenge for a person trying to use a screen reader. There are missing heading and alternate text which tells the screen reader what the mouse or tab clicks are touching whether it is an image or link. The structure of this website makes it hard to navigate. EDUI 6780 Group Project Lesailes Summary

Conclusion:

EDUI 6780 Group Project Conclusion This project offered a unique insight into the usability, readability, and accessibility issues with websites. As a team, we learned a tremendous amount about not only the design process, but how to effectively work together as a team in accomplishing this task. No doubt this project has forever changed our views of website design! - Cohesive Consultants

References:

EDUI 6780 Group Project References Butler, J., Holden, K., & Lidwell , W. (2003). Universal principles of design . ( p. 162). Beverly: Rockport Publishers, Inc. DOI: www.rockpub.com Chipotle mexican grill . (2011, June). Retrieved from http ://www.chipotle.com/en-US/Default.aspx?type=default Disabled World News - The Disabled World accessibility category covers a range of topics including ADA and DDA accessible regulations: http ://www.disabled-world.com/disability/accessibility/# ixzz217BSifXJ

References:

EDUI 6780 Group Project References Fedex. (2012). Fedex office . Retrieved from http :// www.fedex.com/us/office/ Hermes . (2012). Retrieved from http://lesailes.hermes.com/us/en/ Krug, S. (2006). Don't Make Me Think. Berkeley, Ca : New Riders Publishing. Lidwell , W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2003). Universal Principles of Design. Beverly , Massachusetts: Rockport Publishers. U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services. (2012, July 19). Retrieved from Usability.gov : http :// www.usability.gov/methods/design_site/inventory.html WebAim . (2012). Retrieved from http ://wave.webaim.org/

References:

EDUI 6780 Group Project References http://www.cynthiasays.com http://office.microsoft.com http:// office.microsoft.com/en- us/images/ results.aspx?qu = messy+desk&ex =1#ai: MP9 00399350 http://www.motive.co.nz/glossary/web-access.php http://www.totalvalidator.com/index.html

authorStream Live Help