Website Redesign Site Check

Nevermind for now, we replaced with the old site for now to fix a few UI concerns. I'll post back again once it goes live.

Thanks,
PureDezigner

Just a few things to look at for when you do go live.

1. a few validation errors.

2. Using frames is a bad idea these days. Among other reasons, it's not good for folks with disabilities.

3. a flash masthead with navigation is tacky and should be avoided. It's not ADA compliant. Avoid flash, it should only be used for eye candy, nothing more.

4. topnav text runs out of the container. its broken

5. text is too small throughout the site, and needs line-height

6. you should not be using table-based layouts!

I'm not going to look at it anymore since you're really not asking us to yet.

The site you reviewed was the old one , here is the new beta site, http://www.mgdigitalservices.com/clients/artel_beta/ also, I added this link to my post.
Can you please review the beta one and compare to the old one.

Thank you for your time.[img][/img]

Oh, thank god for that! I was afraid you flipped your wig, or had a mental break or something. LOL. This is MUCH better!!

1. It validates !!

2. You dont really need a div surrounding your h1, and h2. But you're not breaking any laws

3. dont really need divs, ads, subnav, banner, nav, breadcrumbs, footer or newsbox, but again, no laws are broken. You could just style the tags themselves.

4. ok, why would you use lists for all other nav, but not inside the footer?

5. I have a problem with the h2's. If you must use an image, get some image replacement in there so its helps with ADA.

6. Have you thought of using a sticky footer?

I like this design, and implementation much better then the one I checked first. The first one was a complete nightmare! looks good!

It's always good to hear feedback from like minded Web Professionals!

Thanks again!

I look forward to hearing from everyone!