Cool But Not Easy
Failures from an organization that's required to know better
-
The body copy of the entire page is done up in <font> tags - at a size of one.
Any unfortunate sod who happens to be looking at this page at default Netscape (any flavor) font settings won't be able to read a damn thing. Update: Fixed, but the size of the type has been reduced for everyone using any browser better than Netscape 4+.
-
The most important navigation elements are too many in number, and the most important ones - "Your Government," "Español," and "Site Map" - are set in 10px bitmapped type.
To add insult to injury, these aren't textgifs. They're text-jpegs, which has consequences for bandwidth (at 2.5KB to load each pair - hover and plain - of images).
-
The layout of the homepage is in "Ice," optimized for 800x600 display resolution.
While the important stuff (640x480 screen cap @ 640x480, 59KB GIF) is for the most part available when the page loads, one has to wonder at the wisdom of the decision to take this approach to the layout of the Web site. It just so happens that at first glance, the rest of the site is laid out to the same conventions. Update: Not resolved, but then 800x600 has become an acceptable floor for expected display size since this article was originally put into production.
-
The display type used for the title and subheads is an absolute joke.
I can appreciate the desire to create a "distinguished" look, and chances are that the type is the same used on stationery, invitations, and other such matter. Problem is, said typeface is applied to stuff for which legibility should have priority over presentation. Update: The face has changed, and it's quite small now.
-
That same display type doesn't have enough contrast.
Why did they even bother including it? Update: Fixed.
-
There is a link to a "Text Only" site, but it's at the bottom of the page (800x600 screen cap @ 800x600, 41KB GIF).
Now, if I'm looking to get past b.s. in a hurry, the last thing I want to have to do is wait until the entire page loads, and then go hunting at the bottom of the page.
-
The accessibility statement crows about things that have been standard practice since 1995.
Not a peep is made about Section 508 compliance. Nor can they feign ignorance; people have been preparing for Section 508 for almost a year, and it took force back in June [2001].
-
The English and Spanish sites are visibly different, and they use the same includes... which are English-only matter (link to side-by-side screen caps @ 36% original size, 25KB JPEG).
I appreciate the desire to appeal to a discrete constituency, but by my way of thinking this implementation reeks of "separate and not equal." Another thing I noticed at the Spanish-language "Education" homepage is that the copy, while adequate, isn't terribly well-written. My first impression from the way it reads is that it was written either as an afterthought, or to an unrealistically tight deadline.
-
W.T.F. is the deal with whitehousekids.gov?
At this time of year, schools are teeming with federal literature. Joe Surfer looking to make a voting decision doesn't need 10% of his visible footprint taken up with something that his kid is probably too asleep at the time to care about. Perhaps they could've bought time on Channel One, or sent out notices directly to schools instead of showing such diffuse focus (an ironic choice of language, given the way the homepage copy is written). Whatever the case, the person responsible for that decision must think a considerable portion of the audience suffers from MPD. Note: Time-sensitive; left unedited.
Conclusion
I for one do not expect the federal government to be sitting on the cutting edge of technological matters not having to do with the fighting of wars or the collection of taxes... but I do expect better from the Web site intended as the Internet mouthpiece of the "Leader of the Free World."
At least the content's not unabashedly partisan.