dcsimg
www.webdeveloper.com
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Please review my rebranded business site

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,356

    Please review my rebranded business site

    Please review my re-branded (and whole new architecture) business site. Open to suggestions for improvement.

    https://portospire.com/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Sheboygan, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,611
    Opened you site, hit F12 and console shows lots of errors.
    Selected the Network tab and dit the performance analysis. 2.6 seconds is real good.

    HTML errors 29
    https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=htt...tospire.com%2F

    CSS Errors (262) Warnings (319)
    https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/...rning=&lang=en

    As you can see, the site needs a lot of work.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,356
    Looking through most of the css errors were from vendor prefixes or where backgrounds and borders used the same colors. Is there a best practice for those types of progressive fall-back type things?

    Looking at the html errors it looks like the parser is inserting blank id attributes? I don't see those blank id (referred to as duplicate) when I view source. Also, the meta last-modified looks like it matches the spec so I'm not sure what is incorrect about it. Any helpful tips?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Sheboygan, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,611
    Open your site and do a CTRL+U
    Open https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=htt...tospire.com%2F in a new tab and compare line numbers.

    As for the butchered CSS, check the debugging console.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,356
    What browser are you using? The css errors I saw from that report were mostly progressive enhancement to give similar experience on more devices (mostly mid age mobile).

    I did find where the navigation menu objects were generating blank attributes and am working on a fix for it now. How I was viewing source wasn't showing empty attributes for some reason.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Sheboygan, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,611
    I use Firefox.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,356
    Thanks, I will take a look at FF debugging console. I wasn't seeing any CSS errors in Chrome's dev tools.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Sheboygan, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,611
    Need to check your work with at least 2 browsers.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,356
    I checked with many more than 2 (IE, Edge, Safari, Chrome, Chrome mobile, etc). Hadn't seen any actual css errors in any of those tools aside from each set not supporting some variation of the progressive enhancement fallback (vendor prefix stuff mostly).

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,356
    Alright, the html errors are nearly eliminated and the css errors are limited to bootstrap and fontawesome intentional breaks from standards. Was there anything else anyone would suggest beyond matching validators?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    3,961
    Not much to complain about. One grammatical error:
    PortoSpire's high-performing team of rockstar specialists builds relationships with businesses to launch a solid, unified, and highly visible web-based presence at minimal costs.
    The traditional PC nav bar looks dated. I'd ditch it and use the three bar nav symbol all the time, not just when there isn't room for a nav bar.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,356
    I probably have read that content way too many times and am skipping over the error when I read it. Where is the grammatical error?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    3,961
    On second thoughts, it is not so straightforwards as I'd imagined. The question is whether "team" should take a singular ("builds") or plural ("build") verb? British usage favours the plural, whilst, apparently, our ex-colonial relatives (i.e. Americans) favour the singular.

    However, in both cases the correct usage is also context dependent. E.g. If the focus of the sentence is on the team as a whole, the singular form is appropriate. Whereas, if the focus is on the members of the team, the plural form should be used.

    So, in this case is it the "team" that "builds relationships with businesses..." or the "rockstar specialists" (members of the team) who "build relationships with businesses..."?

    Lastly, it boils down to which jars, and which flows. IMHO the plural flows, whilst the singular jars. However, that may be influenced by the fact that I am a Brit. So I'm far from unbiased!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    16
    Looks nice, but a bit empty. Try to add more words to the descritption

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,356
    I adjusted the language a bit to eliminate the jarring I think. Removed a lot of words actually since they were not required to convey the concept. Thanks for the feedback. :-)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center