# data[].attributes.body
Hint 1 : Is the font size appropriate? (Remember: Ideal would be around 16-to-18-point.)

Hint 2 : Are the signs positioned at a height suitable for all, including wheelchair users? (Remember: Lower placement helps wheelchair accessibility.)

# data[].attributes.body
Hint: Does the sign material seem glossy or matte? Is there any glare, especially from overhead lights? (Remember: Glare can hinder readability.)

# data[].attributes.body
After listing your observations in the previous questions, think about how an inaccessible signage design might impact library patrons. Share your thoughts below.

# data[].attributes.body
There is clear signage on the top of the shelves, would prefer not to have the Fic abbreviation but this may fit what it says in the catalogue. As a separate point, if the bottom shelf is not being used, it perhaps should be removed, plus some face out display of titles may aid discoverability.

# data[].attributes.body
It is a tension enough signs so people can wayfind and not so many that they are ignored. It is probably a case of less is more, but some libraries go the ultra minimalist route so you have to walk through the whole library to find the right section. Clear, and simple signage is to be preferred.

# data[].attributes.body
the font size for the main signs is good but they are too high up

the font size for the secondary signs is too small

# data[].attributes.body
main signs font size are good, they are paced a bit high.

Secondary signs are at a better height and font looks right

# data[].attributes.body
signage seems a little shiny perhaps getting glare from the light which is made worse by the material on the sign holders and the shelf ends.

I would be inclined to change FIC to read Fiction for clarity

# data[].attributes.body
1) They are using a large font size for easy interpretation of characters and content

2) It is a simplistic design with several areas of white space to make the content more visually acute and easier to parse

3) The signs on the left have directional arrows that additionally contextualize the content of the sign by providing visual cues without it being too visually cluttered

# data[].attributes.body
1) The use of abbreviations is difficult to interpret. Using fiction instead of FIC in the sign content is more easily understandable and avoids difficulties in understanding from the patron perspective as related to library jargon

2) The signs are inconsistent in design. The ones on the left have arrows and do not include a header, and they are written with traditional print features (left to right). The signs on the right are not written traditionally and are one word per line and do include a header. More consistent designs could support patrons with increased understanding of the signage.

3) The large signs are enclosed in a clear glossy sign holder that could impede patron interpretation of the signs due to the glare. Also speaking to inconsistency, maybe foam like signs (similar to the ones attached to the shelf) would be more applicable to sign interpretation as well as a cohesive promotional style.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel that signage and promotions rooted in inaccessible design will deter the patrons that cannot utilize them (or have difficulties otherwise) and effectively limit their willingness or capability to engage further with the library and its materials. It could inhibit them from locating or interacting with materials they need or desire which could, on a larger scale, impact their perception of the library and cause them to not visit the library altogether. There are several negative connotations and outcomes surrounding inaccessible signage.

# data[].attributes.body
glare

# data[].attributes.body
Font size is good. Signs could be lower though.

# data[].attributes.body
Glare on the upper signs.

# data[].attributes.headline
It looks like there is no matted material on the brochure. 

# data[].attributes.subject
It looks like there is no matted material on the brochure. 

# data[].attributes.headline
The matting could be improved so it is less glossy as described by the patrons. 

# data[].attributes.subject
The matting could be improved so it is less glossy as described by the patrons. 