I find the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA checks a website fails, fix them in the code, and re-run the same tests to show the difference.
How it works
- Automated testing across up to five pages, plus a manual keyboard and focus-order review of one purchase flow
- Every machine-detectable finding named by its WCAG success criterion, located, and prioritised
- Code-level fixes, not a widget
- A before-and-after scan so the improvement is measurable
A fixed-price sprint covers every critical finding and up to twenty-five serious ones. Anything past that is listed with the rest, priced separately, and never quietly folded in — an unbounded “we fix everything” is how this work goes wrong for both of us.
How this page is built
A scan of this page with axe-core 4.13.0 against the WCAG 2.1 A and AA rulesets reported no violations on 10 August 2026. Automated rules cover roughly a quarter to a third of the success criteria, so that result is a floor, not a verdict.
Some of the work behind it, as a sample of how I build:
- Keyboard first. Every interactive element is reachable and operable from the keyboard, in an order that matches the visual layout. The skip link above is the first thing you reach with Tab.
- Focus you can see. One focus style applies to everything focusable, not only links, and it stays visible against both colour schemes.
- Text that survives being resized. The layout holds at 320 px and at 200% zoom, and does not clip when a reader forces wider letter and line spacing.
- Colour is never the only signal. Nothing here is distinguished by colour alone, and every text pairing in both palettes measures at or above the 7:1 enhanced ratio.
- Structure you can navigate by. Real landmarks and headings in order, so a screen-reader user can jump straight to a section instead of listening to the whole page.
- Links that make sense out of context. Screen-reader users often pull up a list of links alone — so each one says where it goes, without relying on the sentence around it.
What this page does not claim
That list is a sample, not a conformance report, and this page is not offered as one. WCAG 2.1 AA has fifty success criteria; the work above touches some of them. No screen-reader pass, assistive-technology testing, or independent audit has been performed on this page, and several criteria — error handling, status messages, consistency across a multi-page journey — cannot be exercised by a page this simple.
I would rather show you a bounded, checkable claim than an unbounded one. That is the same standard the reports use. If you find something on this page that does not work for you, tell me and I will fix it.
Automated testing detects only a subset of WCAG success criteria. Some criteria require human judgement and a deeper manual audit, which is scoped separately. This is a technical audit, not legal advice — WCAG conformance is a technical measurement, while a legal determination is a matter for counsel.