Accessibility

A Vendor Claim Is Not the Same as a Tested Workflow

A vendor claim can start the accessibility conversation, but teams still need to understand whether the real workflow has been checked.

What Accessibility Review Is Actually Looking For

Accessibility review is not a scavenger hunt for WCAG failures. It is a quality check on whether people can actually use the thing you built.

Start with the Path, Not the Checklist

Accessibility work goes better when teams understand the path early instead of treating WCAG like a last-minute checklist.

“Make It Accessible” Is Not a Requirement

“Make it accessible” is a good intention, but it is not enough for a team to build, test, accept, or review. Useful accessibility requirements describe the behavior people need.

Good Accessibility Requirements Prevent Rework

Accessibility requirements do not need to be complicated. They need to be clear enough that the team knows what to build, test, accept, and review.

Focus Visible and Focus Order

A practical Field Guide page about making keyboard focus visible, predictable, and ordered so people do not lose their place on the page.

Error Messages and Recovery

A practical Field Guide page about writing and placing error messages so users can understand what went wrong and recover without guessing.

Keyboard-Only Navigation

A practical Field Guide page about checking whether people can move through screens, controls, menus, dialogs, and forms without using a mouse.

Form Review Checklist

A practical checklist for reviewing labels, instructions, required fields, errors, grouping, and recovery before a form goes to accessibility review.

Forms and Labels

A practical Field Guide page about labels, instructions, grouping, and required fields that help forms feel usable instead of like guessing games.