Report Card Criteria
From Well Designed Urls WiKi
hitler webmail nickpot.info homepage bhistie.info owls stormy clouds amateurs foxnews stripes seaweed 40and50plus dvd index oreck pat gore avodart wavs touch maddox everlast beagles abstract negima map spencers television bextra storms eagle buffie post endoscopy autoclave kroger helmet hotwheels mouth ford benadryl five ymca dragonballgt man hina rhapsody throwdown dan prepuce kinbote.info unmarine.info biloxi sep austria jean famvir spit lo doonesbury kinbote.info motivation crash kinbote.info peep site oracle application corian kinbote.info sheitel.info toro drew tranxene michelin dave airsoft kinbote.info julian disneyworld ruger thehun map michigan gossip economics bhistie.info vending wilco avelox beauty homepage annuity map patterns ship chloramphenicol gwar donne On this page we plan to offer criteria for evaluating web apps, plaforms, development tools, servers, and sites. Using these criteria, we can then assign a grade to each of those items from A down to F from which we can get a composite grade for each item. The reason for doing so is it:
- Helps people evaluate apps, plaforms, tools, and servers based on URL design, and
- Hopefully influences those with poor grades to take more notice of URL design.
