For this e-commerce pattern library, I focused on the simplicity of the design layout because I wanted the user to be easily guided along with the site. I decided on a light, neutral background, accented by brighter colors so that all of the buttons would be visible for anyone using them. The levels of hierarchy are easy to distinguish, and the site is designed and has been tested for anyone to be able to pick up in the code where another has left off. It has also passed all of the tests with flying colors. I have worked extremely hard on my e-commerce pattern library and believe that I deserve the grade below, but will leave it ultimately to your professional opinion.
Style & design — 3
The pattern library is cohesive and is very well designed. All colours match and there is unity throughout the site.
Patterns — 3
Before finding out what the surprise pages were, I went ahead and made extra patterns that might have been needed. When making the surprise patterns, I had no trouble with creating them. There are enough patterns in the library to make an entire site.
Explanations — 3
I have made the explanations detailed enough for another person to fully understand the uses for each of the patterns. The descriptions are detailed and unique.
Accessibility — 3
Surf 1685 works really well under all of the standard accessibility tests. People with screen-readers, vision impairment, or mobility impairment would all be able to navigate through the site.
Semantics — 3
I believe that my pages display an excellent demonstration of HTML tags and correct use.
Responsiveness — 3
My site looks great on all screen sizes, has a load time of 2.185s, a speed index of 1.105s, and has passed the web page test. According to the Google Mobile-Friendly Test, my site is also is mobile friendly and is easy to use on a mobile device, and achieved 99 on Mobile speed score and 100 on desktop. The images are only as big as they need to be, are optimized, and smushed.
Code quality — 2
I believe that my code quality is worth a 2 because I hope that my semantics are perfect, but there is probably something wrong with some of them.
Git and commits — 2
My commit messages are good but could have been more descriptive.
22/24 — 92%