W3C Subscribe to W3C RSS feed

I put the same page into two checkers. One says “needs review.” The other says “fail.” If your team has used more than one automated accessibility checker, you’ve probably seen this. So which one is right? I decided to answer that with numbers. The 37 accessibility test rules that W3C has approved come with 558 approved examples, each one labeled with the correct answer: this HTML passes, this HTML fails. I ran them through axe-core and IBM Equal Access, one by one. Of the 430 cases both tools checked, 413 agreed on whether the example fails (407 if you count “cannot tell” as its own result). The 17 that split were mostly cases where one tool returned cannot tell, or where one tool failed code that ACT doesn’t consider a failure. ACT rules are the yardstick for this comparison. The format they’re written in, ACT Rules Format 1.1, became a W3C Recommendation, W3C’s name for an official web standard, in February 2026. ...

WCAG 3 September 2026 Working Draft explained: one conformance line, Bronze/Silver/Gold as reporting tiers, and 216 requirements counted by hand.

Where WCAG 3 (3.0) stands in the March 2026 W3C Working Draft: the 12-category, 44-guideline structure, requirement counts, and the return of Bronze/Silver/Gold.

W3C has published WCAG-EM 2.0, its accessibility evaluation methodology, twelve years after 1.0. What changed — from websites to apps, e-books and kiosks — the five-step procedure, sampling and random checks, and how it maps to Korea's certification.

Explore how WCAG 3(3.0)'s conformance model moves beyond A/AA/AAA. Covers the Core/Supplemental/Assertions structure, the returning Bronze/Silver/Gold levels, and views/processes-based scope, based on the March 2026 draft.

WCAG 3.0 restructures accessibility into Guidelines, Outcomes, and Methods. Covers the 153 requirements (Core 92 + Supplemental 61), Atomic vs. Holistic Tests, and a login-form example vs WCAG 2.2.

WCAG evolved from 1.0 to 2.2 over 26 years. This post explains why WCAG 3.0 exists: the All-or-Nothing dilemma, checkbox accessibility, and the shift from pass/fail checklists to user outcomes.