The Himax website: turning usability checks into page improvements
This first-party account, prepared by Himax, covers technical and content improvements to our own website completed on November 2, 2026. It explains the problems, changes and verification. It is not a client growth case or evidence of increased search exposure, AI recommendations or qualified inquiries.
Context: checking the journeys across an existing bilingual site
The site already had Chinese and English pages for store builds and operations. We began with visitor tasks: understand a service, switch language, open a contact option and distinguish a demo from production delivery.
The review found contact links without a connected target, issues with mobile language access and service-page switching, and page information that needed separate checks in the initial response, visible content and sharing metadata.
What changed in this phase
The table records the problems and work completed on November 2. The website will continue to change, so this dated phase should not be treated as a permanent statement about every part of the site.
| Area | Before | Completed in this phase |
|---|---|---|
| Contact paths | Some contact links pointed to an unconnected page target | Connected the existing WeChat contact card, including direct contact links, keyboard closing and focus return |
| Language and navigation | The mobile language option was hidden; service-page switching returned to the homepage | Kept the language option available on mobile and linked to the corresponding service in the other language |
| Readable content and metadata | Some displayed information depended on scripts; English language and sharing metadata needed alignment | Updated initial page information and English metadata, and checked content against structured descriptions |
| Page discovery | The sitemap included in-page fragments | Listed real page URLs without treating positions within a page as separate pages |
| Company and preparation information | There were no dedicated pages bringing together company details and build preparation | Added company and store preparation pages with links from relevant pages |
| Demo and production launch | Wording could confuse the demo target with production launch timing | Clarified that a demo supports discussion and that launch depends on the agreed project scope and schedule |
How we checked the implementation
After publication, we retrieved pages from the production domain and checked status codes, initial content, language counterparts, sharing metadata and structured content. Interactions and responsive layouts were checked on a local production build of the same version. Browser navigation to the production domain timed out at that time, so local screenshots were not presented as production-browser screenshots.
- Desktop, tablet and mobile: checked reading, button visibility and unintended horizontal overflow.
- Contact: checked opening, direct contact links, keyboard operation and returning focus.
- Language paths: checked that switching from a service page preserved the service context.
- Without JavaScript: retained readable information and a fallback for the existing QR code.
- Content consistency: checked the meaning of the demo so that different descriptions did not imply conflicting delivery commitments.
Verified results and unanswered questions
The verified result of this phase is the technical state of pages and paths: the repaired contact targets and language links passed checks, and the new content was accessible from the production domain.
At the time of writing, comparable results for search, AI citations, referral traffic and qualified inquiries had not been collected. Opening a QR card is not a scan or an inquiry, and publishing a page does not prove it has been indexed. We have not assigned growth rates to missing data.
Several changes were published on the same day, with overlapping pages and observation periods. Later changes in performance would need to be assessed alongside other influences; the same increase cannot be credited independently to every modification.
A method you can use on another site
Record the original state, then check whether the implementation resolved the identified problem. Evaluate technical delivery, content understanding and business outcomes separately. When evidence is missing, define how to obtain it.
- Choose a visitor task, such as starting a conversation from a service page, and follow the full path.
- Record the page, date, problem and change, keeping the previous state.
- Check representative screen sizes, languages and keyboard interactions, then verify the published content on the production site.
- Define separate outcome metrics, observation windows and sources so that a working button is not mistaken for inquiry growth.
Turn a website issue into a reviewable task
Share the URL, affected language or device and the action a visitor should be able to complete. These give us a starting point for discussing the improvements.
Discuss website improvements