UWSAG Rating Criteria

(Revised as of September 7, 2004)

You may apply for a higher rating after ninety (90) days, after improvements have been made. The process will take up to four (4) weeks. Each rated program will be included in the "Hall of Awards" in the appropriate level. Applicants that refuse a rating or get one revoked, can not re-apply for anything other than an Alpha Rating for one (1) year.

Points allowed are listed in () before each criterion. (# total) indicates that the number (#) is the maximum points allowed for this criterion.

Please press the red i at pointedthe end of many criterions, for more indepth information about each criterion. Doing so is highly recommended.

Automatic Disqualifications

Please make sure that your AP abides by the following simple rules as these are absolutely required in order to process any rating application:

• As we think highly of our childeren, your AP does not have any content that is deemed unfit for childeren to see (inlcuding links to such sites).
• Make sure you own everything on your site or have clearly written permission to use it. So no instances of copyright infringement ought to happen. i
• Requirement to sign your Guest Book, the use a password to access pages, or the inclusion of a right-click-disabling script are not present on your AP.
• Your award program works by means of clearly detailed criteria which will be the only measurement to grant awards.
• To get a full overview of winner presentations, we'd like to see at least five (5) winners listed and at least one winner in every "level" you offer. i (this is not required for those programs applying for the Alpha rating)

Basic Criteria

Each of the criteria in the Basic section must also be present before the evaluation can continue.

• (2) There is a link to your award program on your homepage, unless it stands alone.
• (2) You clearly indicate whether you notify all applicants of their results or only winners, and how long the application process will take to complete.
• (2) You show a purpose statement on your AP, to indicate your reason for existence.

Main Criteria
Below are the various areas that we will examine and score upon:

• (6 total) Coding: Do you have correct HTML tags and attributes? Are there no visible coding fragments on the page? Does every technology used work as intended? (e.g. java applets have a specific purpose) i
• (3 total) Content: Is the content free of any grammar or spelling errors? Is if displayed in an accessible language structure? i
• (2 total) Design: Are all graphics original and is the design consistent and exclusive to the site with a high-level of skill? i
• (3 total) Navigation: Are all pages inter-connected and do they follow a logical process? (use of browser back button not required) i
• (5 total) Award Graphic: Do the award graphics, which are displayed on the website (sample OK), have a description? Is the graphic smaller than 200*200 pixels and weighting less than 15Kb? Does it demonstrate a good level of skill concerning color use, optimization, and general design? i
• (3 total) Evaluator: Is there an "Evaluator(s)" profile page present with qualifications to judge? i
• (19 total) Criteria: As the criteria are the most important part of an award program, are they clear, consistent, and positive with a good distinction between DQ and what what is scored on? i
• (10 total) Winners: Are winners presented with a maximum of information? (date, screenshot, laudation, own comments) i
• (2 total) Application: Do you use besides an application form also an e-mail alternative?
• (6 total) Policies: Can a Privacy Policy, Ethics Policy, and Copyright statement easily be found on your award program?

Extra Points Possible:

• (1) Do you send a confirmation of receipt message to all applicants?
• (1) Do you inform every applicant of the result after the evaluation process is complete?
• (1) Do you offer additional resources to help those who wish to better their websites? (not including a simple link-list)
• (1) Does your AP conform fully to W3C [D]standards?
• (1) Does your AP conform fully to Cynthia says AAA [D] standards?

This gives a total of 65 points to win plus an extra 5 bonus points.

Instructions for Nominating a Seal of Approval Site

Please note that when applying for an upgrade to 4.0 or above, it will be required to actively participate in the SOA Incentive Program by placing nominations and practising the courtesies recommended for Bronze, Silver and Gold SOA nominees. Non-compliance will result in an automatic downgrade to 3.0+. (This will affect all new and upgrading applications after 7 September 2004)

If it is evident that a SOA applicant has read your criteria, you should place a nomination for their site even if they did not win your award.

For Bronze Seal of Approval Badge holders. If an applicant did not meet your criteria or did not score high enough, but was very close, consider putting that evaluation on a hold. Let the applicant know they have X number of days to correct the error. This is strictly optional for you to decide on an individual basis. This also applies to sending a courtesy email if a site is beyond being close to the approval score. If an applicant requests what part of your criteria they did not meet, you are encouraged to give them this useful information. All of these guidelines for the Bronze badge are strictly optional for you to decide.

For Silver Seal of Approval Badge holders. The guidelines for the Bronze badge also applies for this level. However, granting these courtesies to the applicant is strongly recommended. This applicant is a holder of 25 nominations. There is a good chance that a simple misunderstanding was involved. Again, this is up to the UWSAG member to handle this on an individual basis.

For Gold Seal of Approval Badge holders. This is an applicant of 50 nominations or more! Their consistency demands respect. Granting the above courtesies is required of the UWSAG Member. A simple misinterpretation of your criteria should never prevent this applicant of having a chance to correct a minor error.

Submit Application

This page has met or exceeded UWSAG Validation Standards