Sometimes we expect code to work in a specific way. Here is another example how we need to test it to be certain. Status messages are so important that they even got their own WCAG success criteria, but make sure your code really works.
Tag: WCAG
Latest posts:
Some brief thoughts on how to make a small business more accessible, at least digitally. Don’t take it as a project, it is a program, a journey.
Advertising is big money. Making your ads inaccessible is expensive. In this post I summarize some common accessibility issues that are present in online adverts.
WCAG 2.2 seems to be around the corner, document is currently a Proposed recommendation. But what does that actually mean?
Keyboard only users (or users of keyboard based assistive technologies) depend on seeing focus indications at all times and if they can’t see them, they are left to guessing where they are. With soon-to-come WCAG 2.2 focus must be at least partially visible at all times, simply put.
Autocomplete and correct keyboard layout when filling out forms are simple and powerful helpers to make less errors when filling out forms. They benefit everybody, but they are even more appreciated by people with different disabilities. Web support is there for years, but what about native mobile applications?
European Accessibility Act is around the corner. 100 weeks is not a lot in terms of conformance and compliance. Especially considering banking, e-commerce and transport services that will be a part of EAA. What to do? Start now!
I don’t like the fact that EN 301 549 is provided in PDF format. It’s way simpler to process HTML. And when I did some parsing I figured out I could also check how exactly does EN 301 549 goes beyond WCAG for web and mobile applications. Quite a lot is the short answer.
Shifting left, that is considering accessibility earliest possible, should be a concept in our school system as well. Basics of accessibility thought earlier in our lives is probably the only sustainable way to make our societies more inclusive and our products and services more accessible.
Just a quick brainstorm when checking a design wireframe for potential accessibility issues, finding low level problems that may be solved way earlier than we may think. Maybe even before designer became a designer and before developer became a developer?
Are accessibility overlays common on Norwegian municipality websites? Short answer is no, luckily. But when they are they really messed up the site. Not only accessibility-wise but also on mobile devices / smaller screens / when zooming in.
I am not the only one concerned about accessibility and it seems that I also had similar timing, methodology and results. I didn’t go all in with the crawling of absolutely everything and I didn’t test the documents as they did. So that’s why I made a short summary to enrich my own analysis.
This is the fourth part in a series and in this post I expand the automatic analysis report to cover approximately 50 webpages under each of 356 Norwegian municipalities – 17837 URLs to be precise.
The general outcome is quite interesting and I was surprised to see some very positive trends as well.
Accessibility statements can claim all sorts of things but we should test as much as we can to establish the reality. The simplest and quickest way to do that is to use automatic tests. In this post I reflect on the results of automatic tests of homepages for all Norwegian municipalities. You will be surprised as I was.
Accessibility statements required by Web Accessibility Directive are quite efficient indicators of websites accessibility, when sites are audited by professionals with some experiences. We don’t have better data than this at the moment, so let’s process this a bit and then dive into numbers and findings.
What is the state of accessibility of municipal websites in Norway? Now we can get some data based on their official accessibility statements. While doing so we can also draw some conclusions, but this post is only the first part of a series of posts on the subject and talks mainly about motivation, methodology and preparation.
I love WebAIMs Million, but I need to point some things out. Some people may come to wrong conclusions after reading parts of the report and I hope I can improve that. I also think I know the reason and the solution about the still very poor state of accessibility.
I stumbled upon a lot of websites that had untrue accessibility statements. It’s quite easy to know when they are not being honest actually. Some goes even so far to claim they are compliant and conform to WCAG 2.1 on AAA level while their autoplaying hero video with no controls is screaming “lies” to me.
Once again a discussion I had on problems with headings after an accessibility audit. Can we get it right and can we have a sustainable solution? I believe so!
I received a brief question about Web Accessibility in Norway and if it is different from the EU and decided to write a short post as an answer.
A post from fellow accessibility specialist made me think about why people think accessibility is difficult. I think that awareness, knowledge, ethics, involvement and responsibility can help a lot.
In 2023 we got some updates to Norwegian accessibility legislation and I try to summarize the newest situation in this short post.
Private sector should embrace accessibility statements and feedback mechanisms. Starting with measuring accessibility in processes and products and then documenting it in public while offering feedback is the best way to go.
Please forget about automatic document outline and plan accordingly. Make it work for people and not for search engines. It’s once again a team effort – design, develop and content.
Being busy with accessibility audits because everybody want’s to make their accessibility statements made me think about usefulness of them. When is an usability statement useful? Hint – it’s not about how good your Lighthouse scores are. It’s about how you can help real people with real problems.
Looking back at 2022 I can say it was not bad, not bad at all. Incredible experiences, knowledge getting and sharing, contributing to open source, starting my own company, and being invited as a professional head of an newly started institute.
Writing a blog post on the 25th of December allows me to write about wishes. And one of them is to have better tools for accessibility auditing.
This post tries to describe what I would like to get from the tool. Realistically, noting too advanced.
I’ve learned that WCAG can’t be changed a lot and that only additions are allowed. Now I’ve read that WCAG 2.2 will have the 4.1.1 success criterion (parsing) removed. My first reaction was – why and how will we work with problems in HTML then? On the other hand we should probably be happy we can focus on other problems that are more related directly to accessibility.
After giving a talk about accessibility and discussing the lack of awareness I decided to reflect on some thoughts in this post.