"I certainly never write a review about a book I don't think worth reviewing, a flat-out bad book, unless it's an enormously fashionable bad book." --
says, John Gardner in Conversations with John Gardner
Quoted from 'Dictionary of Library and Information Science Quotations'     Edited by Mohamed Taher & L S Ramaiah. ISBN: 8185689423 (New Delhi , Aditya, 1994) p.150. Available @ Amazon.com

Monday, February 18, 2013

Reviewing website: Best Practices

Here is a best practice approach in evaluating Website:

  • Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology ( WCAG-EM ) @ W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Draft 7 February 2013
    Application of this Methodology
    The methodology defined by this document is flexible to allow its implementation in different situations and contexts. It is not required to carry out any of the steps and activities defined by this methodology in any particular sequence. For proper application of this methodology, use all the following Methodology Requirements:
    1: Define the Evaluation Scope
    2: Explore the Target Website
    3: Select a Representative Sample
    4: Audit the Selected Sample
    5: Report the Evaluation Findings
    Results, reports, accessibility statements, and performance scores can only be claimed to be in accordance with this methodology when the evaluation carried out meets these Methodology Requirements.
    See also Google's approach
    See also: Other best practices, worth visualizing:
  • Visual Appeal

  • What or Personality
  • Where or Design & Layout
  • How or Reader Usability
  • Why or Functionality

  • Meeting browser / visitor expectations, Adapted from: graphic-design.com
  • When or Interactive Features (dynamic not static)
  • Which or Content (and context)
  • Why or Layout (and site plan),Adapted from: Yellow Bridge Interactive's Checklist
  • How to use the Website
  •  Website of the Month guidelines ACRL
  • 2013 Annual Website Review Checklist (with metrics to measure web sights)
  • Website Title, Website URL, Category to which it belongs (using a self designed or Library of Congress categories)
    Overall Rating:
    5 star- This website is really good! It doesn't need any changes.
    4 star- The website is good. I would only change a few things.
    3 star- The website is okay. It could use some major changes.
    2 star- The website is bad. It needs a lot of improvement to be good.
    1 star- The website is awful. I will never visit it again.
    Adapted from: Review A Website | SmartGirl Suggests

  • No comments: