The plain text in it is questionable also considering its inconsistent verb tenses. 2. Movement – good Movement had been implemented better than conventions because are no broken links, sidebar and heading buttons were all provided with appropriately large and appropriately distanced spaces complemented with mouse hover actions to have an emphasized possible mouse targets. 3. memory/K. I. S. S – okay The site does not give an idea on where is the user currently located. It does not conserve on the number of possible links to proceed.
If only it had used the mouse hovering style and the disabling of mouse buttons when the website already has in its current display its intended to be displayed web page. Nonetheless, the website had been able to minimize the use of images and not employing animations therefore making it as simple but straight to the point website. Too many images and inclusion of animations such as flash and java might just slow the loading of its web pages. 4. Clustering - superior The website had been able to group well all the topics related to MICS by creating different web pages that would cater each one of them.
There is an about us page for its history, there is individual web pages for its present, past and future symposia and more others. 5. Names – okay The chosen website URL http://msol. net does not gives an idea that it is connected with MICS. It is better if it would be relocated so that its web address could easily be remembered. Most of the web pages in MICS do have text headings therefore it is better to have all its web pages contain it to provide consistency. File naming is just the only good as it suggests where currently the user is. 6. Link clarity - superior
The website had used recognizable but not too fancy mouse hover actions to make what is clickable obvious. 7. Accessibility - good The website had been tested when a Mozilla firefox and Internet Explorer browser attributes such as text size and zoom settings is changed and it was proven that it could still display a nicely presented web page even when they were changed up to two degrees. 8. Purpose – superior Its home page had a brief description of the website’s purpose and what the user can do with it such as registration and submission of papers.
9. Forms – good Except on the follow us section of the website all of the parts of the web site with forms present clear directions and maximum user support. 10. Trunk test - okay Generally, all of the other web pages in the web site exhibit the same good and bad features as the pages with forms. Over all mark: okay The shortcomings presented above are enough to mark it as just an okay web site and disregard the features that had made it superior or good.