lepiforum.de
readable
C Acceptable. Readable, but working against you
Loading speed is diagnostic only; it does not affect this grade or search ranking.
| Subject | Weight | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Interruption | 35.71% | not scored |
| Readability | 28.57% | not scored |
| Accessibility and keyboard | 21.43% | 52 |
| Stability and weight | 14.29% | 98 |
This letter rests on 36% of the grade. The subjects marked “not measured” are left out rather than scored as zero (which would fail a site for something nobody looked at) or as full marks (which would be a claim we have not earned). Readability was measured but is not scored here. We have not measured an article for this site. Homepages, listings and other non-article pages can make our typography measurements reflect navigation rather than prose. The numbers are below; the letter leaves them out until we have measured an article. How this is worked out.
- Largest paint
- 1.4s
- Paywall
- none
- Ad requests
- 0
- Tracker requests
- 0
- Page weight
- 1.2 MB
- Readability
- 16px type · 1.3 line height · 38 characters per line · 17.9:1 contrast
- Accessibility
- 4 automated checks failed (4 serious)
- Green hosting
- not measured
- Measured
- 2026-08-31
Observed interruptions
Ad and tracker counts above are network requests, not counts of visible ads or separate companies. They do not affect the interruption score.
Interruption evidence is incomplete or needs review, so this subject is not scored. Missing evidence is not treated as an interruption-free page.
The type, and who can use it
Measured on 1 rendered page; latest measurement 2026-09-05 — no article measured yet. Every number is a mechanical fact about the page, not a judgment of its design.
| What | Measured | The bar |
|---|---|---|
| Body type size | 16px, 6px at phone width | 16px, the browser default |
| Characters per line | 38 | 45–90 |
| Line height | 1.29 | 1.5 (WCAG 1.4.8) |
| Text contrast | 17.9:1 | 4.5:1 (WCAG AA), 7:1 (AAA) |
| Text column | 62% of the window | at least 45% |
| Reflows at phone width | no — scrolls sideways at 360px | WCAG 1.4.10 |
| Dark mode | no | noted, not scored |
| Automated accessibility checks | 4 automated checks failed (4 serious): html-has-lang, image-alt, link-in-text-block, link-name | WCAG 2.1 A and AA, via axe-core |
| Keyboard | no trap; focus visible on 100% of stops | never trapped, always visible |
| Structure | no main landmark, 0 h1, no skipped heading levels | a main landmark, one h1, no skips |
| Alt text | 0% of 29 content images described | every content image |
| Reader mode | parses | parses (Firefox’s Readability) |
Automated accessibility checks catch an estimated 30–40% of real problems, so “no automated violations detected” is a floor, not a certificate. We never say “accessible”. How these are scored.
Measurement dates
Oldest evidence 50 days old. At least one subject is due for rechecking (30 days or older). Dates refer to the evidence, never the card rebuild.
- Access and interruptions:
- Readability and accessibility:
Measurement history
Earlier dated observations are not available on this report card. Current subject dates are listed above; previous grades cannot be reconstructed from them.
How we know
| Pages rendered | 1 |
|---|---|
| Site verdict | errors dropped; majority of remaining; ties to the stricter verdict; active reviewed exclusions override admission |
| Figures shown | numeric measurements generally use medians; interruption costs, overflow, keyboard traps and accessibility failures retain the strongest observed finding |
| Cited by | 2,681 encyclopedia articles |
| Flagged | at least one render was degraded, so this card is queued for re-measurement |
Think this is wrong? It may well be — the measurements cover only a handful of pages. Any reviewed admission decision and its dated evidence are shown above. Re-measurement on request is not built yet, so there is no button here that would do anything. When it exists it will be free and it will be on this page.