Guide Subscribe to Guide RSS feed

Introduction “We used red and green to distinguish them, so it should be fine.” It’s a thought that comes up naturally during development. But more people than you’d expect have difficulty telling those two colors apart. Statistics based on Northern European ancestry suggest that roughly 1 in 12 men and 1 in 200 women have red-green color vision deficiency. The exact ratio varies by region and genetic background, but the fact remains: there are always users who struggle to distinguish red from green. ...

↻ 2026-07-30 Updated Updated the basis document to the W3C Working Draft of March 3, 2026 — one draft newer than the version cited at publication time. Introduction This is the sixth post in the WCAG 3.0 series. This time I want to unpack what “beyond the web” actually means in practice. The earlier posts looked at structure, testing, and Assertions — now it’s time to get clear on “how far does the scope actually reach?” ...

Introduction Have you ever tried using the internet without a mouse? Most people take their mouse for granted. But there are many people who can’t use one. People with physical disabilities who can’t operate a mouse People with repetitive strain injuries like carpal tunnel syndrome People with temporary arm injuries Power users who simply find keyboards more efficient For these users, the question “Can I use this site with just a keyboard?” is crucial. ...

↻ 2026-07-30 Updated This post reflects the W3C Working Draft of March 3, 2026. Foundational was renamed to Core, so related wording has been corrected, and the Assertions count (28) and their role in level determination have been updated to match the current draft. Introduction In Atomic Tests vs. Holistic Tests: A New Testing Methodology, we discussed balancing Atomic and Holistic tests. Now we need to address how we’ll “assert” and “document” these results. This is where Assertions come in. ...

↻ 2026-07-30 Updated This post reflects the W3C Working Draft of March 3, 2026. It accounts for Foundational being renamed to Core, and the basis-document reference has been corrected to the current draft. Introduction When people hear “accessibility testing,” they often think of a checklist: “Does this button have alternative text?” “Is the contrast ratio high enough?” WCAG 2.2 is built around clear pass/fail checks like these. WCAG 3.0 moves toward a broader unit of evaluation, aiming to consider overall user experience quality. That shift naturally changes how we test. We now combine fine-grained checks (Atomic) with real-world contextual evaluation (Holistic). ...

↻ 2026-09-10 Updated The Working Draft of September 10, 2026 changed the conformance model again. Bronze/Silver/Gold below are no longer conformance levels. The September draft sets a single conformance line (all core requirements met) and moves the levels into reporting tiers below and above conformance. Core requirements now carry severity tags (Physical harm, Risk, Barrier, Friction), and the conformance section moved from Exploratory to Developing. The body below still reflects the March draft; the new structure is covered in What Changed in the WCAG 3 September 2026 Draft. ↻ 2026-07-30 Updated ...

Developers often make the same mistake after learning ARIA. They understand the concept, but they are unsure when and how to apply it in real projects. ARIA practical guide main visual with ARIA attributes highlighted in a code editor Cover image example: visual that symbolizes applying ARIA attributes · Generated by Nanobanana AI You may have heard the phrase: “ARIA is a last resort.” Use semantic HTML first, and add ARIA only when native HTML is not enough. This guide follows that principle and shows how to use ARIA effectively in real work. ...

↻ 2026-07-30 Updated Numbers and terminology have been corrected to reflect the W3C Working Draft of March 3, 2026. The requirement count has been corrected from 170+ to 153 (Core 92 + Supplemental 61), and Foundational has been replaced with Core. The widely-circulated figure of “174” is not traceable to a source, so it has not been used here. Introduction “1.3.1 Info and Relationships - Level A” If you’ve worked with WCAG 2.2, you’re familiar with this format of Success Criteria. Numbers, levels, and clear test conditions. This structure has been the standard for web accessibility for over 15 years. ...

↻ 2026-07-30 Updated Refreshed the timeline: added the 3 March 2026 Working Draft milestone and revised the completion outlook against the working group’s schedule (CR snapshot targeted for Q4 2027). Introduction “Our site passed WCAG 2.1 AA 100%, but screen reader users still can’t sign up.” I keep thinking about this comment I heard at a conference last year. They passed accessibility audits, got the green badge, but users with disabilities still couldn’t use core features. This is the biggest dilemma facing WCAG 2.x today. ...

Introduction As a web developer, you’ve probably encountered code like this: html Read line numbers: OFF Line-number reading help Reading line numbers aloud This button is for screen reader users. ...