Livermore Fine Arts Studio
Find a class. Evaluate the studio. Take the next step.
Story phrases drive element emphasis and evidence matching. Reading approach adjusts emphasis only. Rule scores and general findings assess the page; AX and Tab order come from saved browser evidence.
Prioritized review findings. Select a location or open the action plan for evidence and verification.
Page analysis
Stable location numbers in page order; filtered strengths can leave gaps.
Inspect a review location
Key issues found
Priorities assigned during review.
Section-by-section analysis
Select a row to locate the finding on the page.
Overall recommendations
Four useful places to start.
Strengths to preserve
What stands out for this task?
An inspectable element hypothesis. The score combines prominence, matching terms, reading intent and visible area.
Select an element
Click a highlighted element on the capture or a ranked item to see the evidence behind its emphasis.
Tune the hypothesis
These are editable design assumptions, not fitted eye-tracking coefficients. Focused reading removes the first-glance length adjustment. Longer relevant passages can sustain attention; neither text length nor image size determines dwell time.
Task matches elsewhere on the page
Research basis: spotted, layer-cake and commitment scanning ↗
Lens checks
User stories · evidence to verify
Describe a visitor and goal, then list the words or phrases you expect the page to contain. This checks saved evidence locally. It does not navigate, submit forms, use AI, or simulate a person.
Conditions to verify (optional)
Define a story to inspect its evidence.
Reader paths & source checks
Inspect the original browser evidence. Story terms highlight relevant labels; they do not reorder the AX tree or the recorded keyboard sequence.
What returned from the original report—and what is still untested
| Evidence | Coverage in this report |
|---|---|
| AX reading and Tab paths | Restored with their original screenshots, complete recorded step lists and capture dates. Desktop 1265 px, mobile 375 px and reflow 320 px. |
| iPhone 16 Pro Max 440 px | Current DOM measurements and image available. No matching recorded AX or Tab traversal; the older mobile path is explicitly separate. |
| Contrast and source headings | Original contrast spot checks and raw-source heading map restored here. Unresolved contrast cases remain review items. |
| Visitor goals | Active story phrases feed element emphasis and lexical evidence checks. Roles and goals supply context. Task completion, reading time and comprehension are untested. |
| Page quality | Design-rule scores, semantic review and action items remain in their sections. They are page-wide findings, not a user-story success score. |
| Robots and agents | Current lens buttons filter saved observations. They do not run a crawler, autonomous agent or screen reader. |
Open the original full LFA audit · Download path evidence and source hashes
Design, content & task audit
Measured typography, copy, actions and layout; configurable review thresholds; cited semantic judgments; and observed behavior when supplied.
A review flag identifies something to inspect. “Within range” means it meets the selected threshold; it does not prove good usability. Unavailable evidence stays unassessed. Each viewport is evaluated independently.
Element evidence
Threshold changes apply to the saved measurements in this report. Export the config to repeat the same rules on another capture. Scores, findings and geometry are tied to the captured date and viewport. The element explorer shows confirmed href attributes and computed box overlaps; an overlap is not a confirmed obstruction.
Recommended changes
Specific actions, with the observations and checks behind them.
Evidence & method
Inspect the capture, rubric and research limits when you need the detail.