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?” Important: This post is based on the WCAG 3.0 Working Draft (2026-02-20). The Draft is subject to change, and this post may be updated accordingly. ...
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. The scoring and conformance model covered in WCAG 3.0 Conformance Model: Changes After A/AA/AAA also connects with Assertions. This is because they provide a way to supplement areas not covered by quantitative tests with organizational processes and evidence. ...
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). This shift directly connects to the score-based conformance model discussed in WCAG 3.0 Conformance Model: Beyond A/AA/AAA. The weight you give each test type can change the score and the level you reach. ...
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. However, as we explored in the previous article, this approach had limitations. “Websites that pass checkboxes but are actually unusable” are proof of this. WCAG 3.0 has completely redesigned the structure itself to address this issue. It didn’t just add items—it changed the way we evaluate accessibility. ...
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. If you’re a developer or designer working on web accessibility, you’ve probably heard of WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines). Recently, a new guideline called WCAG 3.0 has emerged, and many people are wondering: ...
This post is a record of grappling with web accessibility, public web services, and the responsibilities of developers from direct, hands-on experience. Between law, technology, standards, and reality, I try to answer the question: “Are we really building for everyone?” In the previous post, we confirmed that the Digital Inclusion Act asks “what is usable?” Then this question remains: If AI is a system that makes decisions? If users can’t understand automated decisions? How do we distinguish between content created by generative AI? ...
This post is a record of grappling with web accessibility, public web services, and the responsibilities of developers from direct, hands-on experience. Between law, technology, standards, and reality, I try to answer the question: “Are we really building for everyone?” In the previous post, we reached this question: Even after meeting accessibility standards, why are so many people still excluded from digital services? The institutional answer to this question is the Digital Inclusion Act. ...
This piece is a record of wrestling with web accessibility, public services, and a developer’s responsibility from the field. Between law and technology, between standards and reality, I try to answer: “Are we really building for everyone?” While working on web accessibility for years, I found myself repeatedly hearing a similar question: “We’re certified and passed the checklist. Isn’t accessibility done now?” When I first heard this question, I nodded briefly. Many public websites did meet WCAG 2.1 / KWCAG 2.2 standards, passed screen reader tests, and satisfied contrast requirements. ...