Web accessibility

01Web accessibility, or e-accessibility, is the inclusive practice of ensuring there are no barriers that prevent interaction with, or access to, websites on the world wide web by people with physical disabilities, situational disabilities, and socioeconomic restrictions on bandwidth and speed.

02When sites are correctly designed, developed, and edited, more users have equal access to information and functionality.

03For example, when a site is coded with semantically meaningful HTML, with textual equivalents provided for images and with links named meaningfully, this helps blind users using text-to-speech software and or text-to-braille hardware.

04When text and images are large and or enlargeable, it is easier for users with poor sight to read and understand the content.

05When links are underlined, or otherwise differentiated, as well as colored, this ensures that colorblind users will be able to notice them.

06When clickable links and areas are large, this helps users who cannot control a mouse with precision.

07When pages are not coded in a way that hinders navigation by means of the keyboard alone, or a single-switch access device alone, this helps users who cannot use a mouse or even a standard keyboard.

08When videos are closed captioned, chaptered, or a sign language version is available, deaf and hard-of-hearing users can understand the video.

09When flashing effects are voided or made optional, users prone to seizures caused by these effects are not put at risk.

10And when content is written in plain language and illustrated with instructional diagrams and animations, users with dyslexia and learning difficulties are better able to understand the content.

11When sites are correctly built and maintained, all of these users can be accommodated without decreasing the usability of the site for non-disabled users.

12The needs that web accessibility aims to address include Visual Visual impairments including blindness Various common types of low vision and poor eyesight Various types of color blindness Motor slash mobility For example, difficulty or inability to use the hands, including tremors, muscle slowness, loss of fine muscle control, etc., due to conditions such as Parkinson's disease, muscular dystrophy, cerebral palsy, stroke Auditory Deafness or hearing impairments, including individuals who are hard of hearing Seizures Photoepileptic seizures caused by visual strobe or flashing effects Cognitive and intellectual Developmental disabilities Learning difficulties Dyslexia Dyscalculia, etc.

13And cognitive disabilities PTSD Alzheimer's Of various origins Affecting memory Attention Developmental maturity Problem solving And logic skills Etc.

14Accessibility is not confined to the list above Rather, it extends to anyone who is experiencing any permanent, temporary, or situational disability.

15Situational disability Situational disability refers to someone who may be experiencing a boundary based on the current experience.

16For example, a person may be situationally one-handed if they are carrying a baby.

17Web accessibility should be mindful of users experiencing a wide variety of barriers.

18According to a 2018 WebAM Global Survey of Web Accessibility Practitioners, Close to 93% of survey respondents received no formal schooling on web accessibility.

19Assistive technologies used for web browsing Individuals living with a disability use assistive technologies such as the following to enable and assist web browsing.

20Screen reader software such as CheckMeister Browser, which can read out, using synthesized speech, Either selected elements of what is being displayed on the monitor, helpful for users with reading or learning difficulties, Or which can read out everything that is happening on the computer, used by blind and vision-impaired users.

21Braille terminals Screen magnification software Screen magnification software, which enlarges what is displayed on the computer monitor, Making it easier to read for vision-impaired users.

22Speech recognition software that can accept spoken commands to the computer, Or turn dictation into grammatically correct text, useful for those who have difficulty using a mouse or a keyboard.

23Keyboard overlays, which can make typing easier or more accurate for those who have motor control difficulties.

24Access to subtitled or sign language videos for deaf people.

25Guidelines on accessible web design Web content accessibility guidelines In 1999, the Web Accessibility Initiative, a project by the World Wide Web Consortium, W3C, published the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines WCAG 1.0.

26On December 11, 2008, the WAI released the WCAG 2.0 as a recommendation.

27WCAG 2.0 aims to be up-to-date and more technology-neutral.

28Though web designers can choose either standard to follow, the WCAG 2.0 have been widely accepted as the definitive guidelines on how to create accessible websites.

29Governments are steadily adopting the WCAG 2.0 as the accessibility standard for their own websites.

30In 2012, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines were also published as an ISO-IEC standard.

31ISO-IEC 4050-0-2012 Information Technology W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines WCAG 2.0 In 2018, the WAI released the WCAG 2.1 recommendation that extends WCAG 2.0.

32Criticism of WAI Guidelines There has been some criticism of the W3C process, claiming that it does not sufficiently put the user at the heart of the process.

33There is a formal objection to WAG's original claim that WCAG 2.0 will address requirements for people with learning disabilities and cognitive limitations headed by Lisa Seaman and signed by 40 organizations and people.

34In articles such as WCAG 2.0, the new W3C guidelines evaluated, to hell with WCAG 2.0 and testability costs too much, the WAI has been criticized for allowing WCAG 1.0 to get increasingly out of step with today's technologies and techniques for creating and consuming web content, for the slow pace of development of WCAG 2.0, for making the new guidelines difficult to navigate and understand, and other argued failings.

35Essential Components of Web Accessibility The accessibility of websites relies on the cooperation of several components.

36Content, the information in a web page or web application, including natural information such as text, images, and sounds, and code or markup that defines structure, presentation, etc.

37Web browsers, media players, and other user agents.

38Assistive Technology In some cases, screen readers, alternative keyboards, switches, scanning software, etc.

39Users' knowledge, experiences, and in some cases, adaptive strategies using the web.

40Developers, designers, coders, authors, etc.

41Including developers with disabilities and users who contribute content.

42Authoring Tools, software that creates websites.

43Evaluation Tools Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools HTML Validators CSS Validators, etc.

44Web developers usually use authoring tools and evaluation tools to create web content.

45People, users, use web browsers, media players, assistive technologies, or other user agents to get and interact with the content.

46Guidelines for Different Components Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines, AEAG A tag contains 28 checkpoints that provide guidance on Producing accessible output that meets standards and guidelines Promoting the content author for accessibility-related information Providing ways of checking and correcting inaccessible content Integrating accessibility in the overall look and feel Making the authoring tool itself accessible to people with disabilities Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, WCAG WCAG 1.0 14 Guidelines that are General Principles of Accessible Design WCAG 2.0 For Principles that Form the Foundation for Web Accessibility 12 Guidelines, Untestable, that are goals for which authors should aim And 65 Testable Success Criteria The W3C's techniques for WCAG 2.0 is a list of techniques that support authors to meet the guidelines and success criteria The techniques are periodically updated whereas the principles, guidelines, and success criteria are stable and do not change User Agent Accessibility Guidelines, UAG UAG contains a comprehensive set of checkpoints that cover Access to all content User control over how content is rendered User control over the user interface Standard programming interfaces Web Accessibility Legislation Because of the growth in internet usage and its growing importance in everyday life, countries around the world are addressing digital access issues through legislation.

47One approach is to protect access to websites for people with disabilities by using existing human or civil rights legislation.

48Some countries, like the U.S., protect access for people with disabilities through the technology procurement process.

49It is common for nations to support and adopt the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, WCAG 2.0, by referring to the guidelines in their legislation.

50Compliance with Web Accessibility Guidelines is a legal requirement primarily in North America, Europe, parts of South America, and parts of Asia.

51Argentina Law 26.653 on Accessibility to Information on Web Pages Approved by the National Congress of Argentina on November 3, 2010 It specifies in its Article 1 that both the national state and its decentralized organisms, or those companies that are related in any way with public services or goods, must respect the rules and requirements on accessibility in the design of their web pages.

52The objective is to facilitate access to contents to all persons with disabilities, in order to guarantee equal opportunities in relation to access to information, and to avoid discrimination.

53In addition, by Decree 656-2019 the regulation of the aforementioned law now.

5426,653 is approved, and it is reported that the authority in charge of its application will be the ONTI, Officina Nacional de Technologias de Information, National Office of Information Technologies.

55This agency is in charge of assisting and or advising the individuals and legal entities reached by this law, in addition to disseminating, approving slash updating, and also controlling the fulfillment of the accessibility standards and requirements of the web pages, among other functions.

56Australia In 2000, an Australian blind man won a $20,000 court case against the Sydney Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games, SOCOG.

57This was the first successful case under Disability Discrimination Act 1992, because SOCOG had failed to make their official website, Sydney Olympic Games, adequately accessible to blind users.

58The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, HREOC, also published World Wide Web Access, Disability Discrimination Act Advisory Notes.

59All governments in Australia also have policies and guidelines that require accessible public websites.

60Brazil In Brazil, the federal government published a paper with guidelines for accessibility on January 18, 2005, for public reviewing.

61On December 14 of the same year, the second version was published, including suggestions made to the first version of the paper.

62On May 7, 2007, the accessibility guidelines of the paper became compulsory to all federal websites.

63The current version of the paper, which follows the WCAG 2.0 guidelines, is named EMAG, Modelo de Accessibilidade de Governo Electronico, Electronic Government Accessibility Model, and is maintained by Brazilian Ministry of Planning, Budget, and Management.

64The paper can be viewed and downloaded at its official website.

65Canada In 2011, the government of Canada began phasing in the implementation of a new set of web standards that are aimed at ensuring government websites are accessible, usable, interoperable, and optimized for mobile devices.

66These standards replace CommonLook and Feel 2.0, CLF 2.0, standards for the Internet.

67The first of these four standards, Standard on Web Accessibility, came into full effect on July 31, 2013.

68The Standard on Web Accessibility follows the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, WCAG 2.0AA, and contains a list of exclusions that is updated annually.

69It is accompanied by an explicit assessment methodology that helps government departments comply.

70The government also developed the Web Experience Toolkit, WET, a set of reusable web components for building innovative websites.

71The WET helps government departments build innovative websites that are accessible, usable, and interoperable, and therefore comply with the government's standards.

72The WET Toolkit is open source and available for anyone to use.

73The three related web standards are the Standard on Optimizing Websites and Applications for Mobile Devices, the Standard on Web Usability, and the Standard on Web Interoperability.

74In 2019, the government of Canada passed the Accessible Canada Act.

75This builds on the on-provincial legislation like the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, the Accessibility for Manitobans Act, and the Nova Scotia Accessibility Act.

76European Union In February 2014, a draft law was endorsed by the European Parliament stating that all websites managed by public sector bodies have to be made accessible to everyone.

77A European Commission communication on e-accessibility was published on September 13, 2005.

78The Commission's aim to harmonize and facilitate the public procurement of accessible ICT products and services was embedded in a mandate issued to CEN, CENELEC, and EESI in December 2005, reference M376.

79A mandate is a request for the drafting and adoption of a European standard or European standardization deliverables issued to one or more of the European standardization organizations.

80Mandates are usually accepted by the standardization organization because they are based on preliminary consultation, although technically the organization is independent and has a right to decline the mandate.

81The mandate also called for the development of an electronic toolkit for public procurers enabling them to have access to the resulting harmonized requirements.

82The Commission also noted that the harmonized outcome, while intended for public procurement purposes, might also be useful for procurement in the private sector.

83On October 26, 2016, the European Parliament approved the Web Accessibility Directive, which requires that the websites and mobile apps of public sector bodies be accessible.

84The relevant accessibility requirements are described in the European Standard Yen 3.01549 version 3.2.1, published by ETSI.

85EU member states were expected to bring into force by September 23, 2018 laws and regulations that enforce the relevant accessibility requirements.

86Websites of public sector bodies should comply by September 23, 2018.

87Mobile apps by June 23, 2021.

88Some categories of websites and apps are accepted from the Directive, for example, websites and mobile applications of public service broadcasters and their subsidiaries.

89The European Commission's rolling plan for ICT standardization, 2017, notes that ETSI standard Yen 3.01549 version 1.1.2 will need to be updated to add accessibility requirements for mobile applications and evaluation methodologies to test compliance with the standard.

90In 2019, the European Union introduced the European Accessibility Act as one of the leading pieces of legislation for digital accessibility and digital inclusion.

91The European Accessibility Act, EAA, which will enter into force on June 28, 2025, requiring companies to ensure that the newly marketed products and services covered by the Act are accessible.

92All websites will need to adhere to the WCAG principles of perceivable, operable, understandable and robust and deliver comparative levels of user experience to disabled customers.

93As of June 28, 2025, customers will be able to file complaints before national courts or authorities if services or products do not respect the new rules.

94India In India, National Informatics Centre, NIC, under Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, MITEWI, has passed guidelines for Indian government websites, GIGW, for government agencies in 2009, compelling them to adhere to WCAG 2.0 Level A standards.

95Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, MITEWI, has national policy on universal electronic accessibility clearly stated, accessibility standards and guidelines be formulated or adapted from prevailing standards in the domain including World Wide Web Consortium Accessibility Web Standards and Guidelines, such as Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines, AEAG, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, WCAG 2.0, and User Agent Accessibility Guidelines, UAG.

96GIGW aims to ensure the quality and accessibility of government guidelines by offering guidance on desirable practices covering the entire lifecycle of websites, web portals and web applications, right from conceptualization and design to their development, maintenance and management.

97The Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances made the same a part of the Central Secretariat Manual of Office Procedure.

98GIGW 3.0 also significantly enhances the guidance on the accessibility and usability of mobile apps, especially by offering specific guidance to government organizations on how to leverage public digital infrastructure devised for whole-of-government delivery of services, benefits and information.

99The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, RPWD, passed in Parliament.

100The law replaced earlier legislation and provided clear guidance for digital accessibility.

101The RPWD Act, 106 through sections 40 to 46, mandates accessibility to be ensured in all public-centric buildings, transportation systems, information and communication technology, ICT, services, consumer products and all other services being provided by the government or other service providers.

102Ireland.

103In Ireland, the Disability Act, 2005, requires that where a public body communicates in electronic form with one or more persons, the contents of the communication must be, as far as practicable, accessible to persons with a visual impairment to whom adaptive technology is available.

104Section 28.

1052.

106The National Disability Authority has produced a code of practice giving guidance to public bodies on how to meet the obligations of the Act.

107This is an approved code of practice, and its provisions have the force of legally binding statutory obligations.

108It states that a public body can achieve compliance with Section 28.

1092.

110By reviewing existing practices for electronic communications in terms of accessibility against relevant guidelines and standards, giving example of double a conformance with the Web Accessibility Initiatives, WAI, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, WCAG.

111Israel.

112The Israeli Ministry of Justice recently published regulations requiring Internet websites to comply with Israeli Standard 5568, which is based on the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.

113The main differences between the Israeli Standard and the W3C Standard concern the requirements, to provide captions and texts for audio and video media.

114The Israeli standards are somewhat more lenient, reflecting the current technical difficulties in providing such captions and texts in Hebrew.

115Italy.

116In Italy, web accessibility is ruled by the so-called LEG STENKA, STENKA Act, formerly Act N.4 of January 9, 2004, officially published on the Gazetta Official on January 17, 2004.

117The original STENKA Act was based on the WCAG 1.0.

118On March 20, 2013, the standards required by the STENKA Act were updated to the WCAG 2.0.

119Japan.

120Web Content Accessibility Guidelines in Japan were established in 2004 as JIS, Japanese Industrial Standards X8341-3.

121JIS X8341-3 was revised in 2010 as JIS X8341-3.2010 to encompass WCAG 2.0.

122And it was revised in 2016 as JIS X8341-3.2016 to be identical standards with the International Standard ISO slash IEC 4050-0.2012.

123The Japanese organization WAIC, Web Accessibility Infrastructure Committee, has published the history and structure of JIS X8341-3.2016.

124MALTA.

125In Malta, web content accessibility assessments were carried out by the Foundation for Information Technology Accessibility, FIDA, since 2003.

126Until 2018, this was done in conformance with the requirements of the Equal Opportunities Act, 2000, CAP43, and applied WACG guidelines.

127With the advent of the EU web accessibility, Directive the Malta Communications Authority was charged with ensuring the accessibility of online resources owned by Maltese public entities.

128FIDA continues to provide ICT accessibility assessments to public and commercial entities, applying Standard Yen 301549 and WCAG 2.1 as applicable.

129Therefore, both the Equal Opportunities Act anti-discrimination legislation and the transposed EU web accessibility directive are applicable to the Maltese scenario.

130Norway.

131In Norway, web accessibility is a legal obligation under the Act June 20, 2008 No.

13242 relating to a prohibition against discrimination on the basis of disability, also known as the Anti-Discrimination Accessibility Act.

133The Act went into force in 2009 and the Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs published the Regulations for Universal Design of Information and Communication Technology, ICT, solutions in 2013.

134The regulations require compliance with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, WCAG 2.0, slash NS, slash ISO, slash IEC 40500, 2012, Level A, and AA with some exceptions.

135The Norwegian Agency for Public Management and E-Government, DIFI, is responsible for overseeing that ICT solutions aimed at the general public are in compliance with the legislative and regulatory requirements.

136Philippine.

137As part of the web accessibility initiatives in the Philippines, the government through the National Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons, and CWDP, board approved the recommendation of forming an ad hoc or core group of webmasters that will help in the implementation of the Bowako Millennium Framework set by the UNASCAP.

138The Philippines was also the place where the inter-regional seminar and regional demonstration workshop on accessible information and communications technologies, ICT, to persons with disabilities was held where 11 countries from Asia, Pacific, were represented.

139The Manila Accessible Information and Communications Technologies design recommendations was drafted and adopted in 2003.

140Spain.

141In Spain, UNE 13980-3-2012 is the norm entrusted to regulate web accessibility.

142This standard is based on Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.

143Sweden.

144In Sweden, Vrva, the Swedish Administrative Development Agency, is responsible for a set of guidelines for Swedish public sector websites.

145Through the guidelines, web accessibility is presented as an integral part of the overall development process and not as a separate issue.

146The Swedish guidelines contain criteria which cover the entire life cycle of a website, from its conception to the publication of live web content.

147These criteria address several areas which should be considered, including accessibility, usability, web standards, privacy issues, information architecture, developing content for the web, content management systems, CMS, slash authoring tools selection, development of web content for mobile devices.

148An English translation was released in April 2008.

149Swedish National Guidelines for Public Sector Websites.

150The translation is based on the latest version of guidelines which was released in 2006.

151United Kingdom.

152In the UK, the Equality Act 2010 does not refer explicitly to website accessibility, but makes it illegal to discriminate against people with disabilities.

153The Act applies to anyone providing a service, public, private, and voluntary sectors.

154The Code of Practice.

155Rights of access, goods, facilities, services, and premises document published by the Government's Equality and Human Rights Commission to accompany the Act does refer explicitly to websites as one of the services to the public which should be considered covered by the Act.

156In December 2010, the UK released the standard BS8878, colon, 2010 web accessibility.

157Code of Practice.

158This standard effectively supersedes PAS78, pub, 2006, PAS78, produced by the Disability Rights Commission and usable by disabled people.

159The standard has been designed to introduce non-technical professionals to improved accessibility, usability, and user experience for disabled and older people.

160It will be especially beneficial to anyone new to this subject as it gives guidance on process rather than on technical and design issues.

161BS8878 is consistent with the Equality Act 2010 and is referenced in the UK Government's E-Accessibility Action Plan as the basis of updated advice on developing accessible online services.

162It includes recommendations for involving disabled people in the development process and using automated tools to assist with accessibility testing.

163The management of the guidance and process for upholding existing accessibility guidelines and specifications.

164BS8878 is intended for anyone responsible for the policies covering web product creation within their organization and governance against those policies.

165It additionally assists people responsible for promoting and supporting equality and inclusion initiatives within organizations and people involved in the procurement, creation, or training of web products and content.

166A summary of BS8878 is available to help organizations better understand how the standard can help them embed accessibility and inclusive design in their business-as-usual processes.

167On May 28, 2019, BS8878 was superseded by ISO 30000 and 71-to-1, the international standard that built on BS8878 and expanded it for international use.

168A summary of how ISO 30000 and 71-to-1 relates to BS8878 is available to help organizations understand the new standard.

169On April 9, National Rail replaced its blue and white aesthetic with a black and white theme, which was criticized for not conforming to the web content accessibility guidelines.

170The company restored the blue and white theme and said it is investing in modernizing its website in accords to the latest accessibility guidelines.

171In 2019, new accessibility regulations came into force setting a legal duty for public sector bodies to publish accessibility statements and make their websites accessible by September 23rd.

1722020 accessibility statements include information about how the website was tested and the organization's plan to fix any accessibility problems.

173Statements should be published and linked to on every page on the website.

174United States In the United States, Section 508 Amendment to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires all federal agencies' electronic and information technology to be accessible to those with disabilities.

175Both members of the public and federal employees have the right to access this technology, such as computer hardware and software, websites, phone systems, and copiers.

176Also, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability for entities receiving federal funds and has been cited in multiple lawsuits against organizations, such as hospitals that receive federal funds through Medicare-Medicaid.

177In addition, Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, ADA, prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability.

178There is some debate on the matter.

179Multiple courts and the U.S.

180Department of Justice have taken the position that the ADA requires website and app operators and owners to take affirmative steps to make their websites and apps accessible to disabled persons and compatible with common assistive technologies, such as the JAWS screen reader, while other courts have taken the position that the ADA does not apply online.

181The U.S.

182Department of Justice has endorsed the WCAG 2.0AA standard as an appropriate standard for accessibility in multiple settlement agreements.

183Numerous lawsuits challenging websites and mobile apps on the basis of the ADA have been filed since 2017.

184These cases appear spurred by a 2017 case, Gil V.

185Winn-Dixie Stores, in which a federal court in Florida ruled that Winn-Dixie's website must be accessible.

186Around 800 cases related to web accessibility were filed in 2017, and over 2,200 were filed in 2018.

187Additionally, though the Justice Department had stated in 2010 that they would publish guidelines for web accessibility, they reversed this plan in 2017, also spurring legal action against inaccessible sites.

188A notable lawsuit related to the ADA was filed against Domino's Pizza by a blind user who could not use Domino's mobile app.

189At the federal district level, the court ruled in favor of Domino's as the Justice Department had not established the guidelines for accessibility, but this was appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

190The Ninth Circuit overruled the district court, ruling that because Domino's is a brick-and-mortar store which must meet the ADA and the mobile app and extension of their services, their app must also be compliant with the ADA.

191Domino's petition to the Supreme Court, backed by many other restaurants and retail chains, arguing that this decision impacts their due process since disabled customers have other, more accessible means to order.

192In October 2019, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, which effectively upheld the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court and requires the case to be heard as it stands.

193The number and cost of federal accessibility lawsuits has risen dramatically in the last few years.

194Website accessibility audits.

195A growing number of organizations, companies, and consultants offer website accessibility audits.

196These audits, a type of system testing, identify accessibility problems that exist within a website and provide advice and guidance on the steps that need to be taken to correct these problems.

197A range of methods are used to audit websites for accessibility.

198Automated tools such as the CheckMeister website evaluation tool are available, which can identify some of the problems that are present.

199Depending on the tool, the result may vary widely, making it difficult to compare test results.

200Expert technical reviewers, knowledgeable in web design technologies and accessibility, can review a representative selection of pages and provide detailed feedback and advice based on their findings.

201User testing, usually overseen by technical experts, involves setting tasks for ordinary users to carry out on the website and reviewing the problems these users encounter as they try to carry out the tasks.

202Each of these methods has its strengths and weaknesses.

203Automated tools can process many pages in a relatively short length of time, but can only identify a limited portion of the accessibility problems that might be present in the website.

204Technical expert review will identify many of the problems that exist, but the process is time-consuming and many websites are too large to make it possible for a person to review every page.

205User testing combines elements of usability and accessibility testing and is valuable for identifying problems that might otherwise be overlooked, but needs to be used knowledgeably to avoid the risk of basing design decisions on one user's preferences.

206Ideally, a combination of methods should be used to assess the accessibility of a website.

207Remediating inaccessible websites.

208Once an accessibility audit has been conducted and accessibility errors have been identified, the errors will need to be remediated in order to ensure the site is compliant with accessibility errors.

209The traditional way of correcting an inaccessible site is to go back into the source code, reprogram the error, and then test to make sure the bug was fixed.

210If the website is not scheduled to be revised in the near future, that error, and others, would remain on the site for a lengthy period of time, possibly violating accessibility guidelines.

211Because this is a complicated process, many website owners choose to build accessibility into a new site design or relaunch, as it can be more efficient to develop the site to comply with accessibility guidelines, rather than to remediate errors later.

212With the progress in AI technology, web accessibility has become more accessible.

213With third-party add-ons that leverage AI and machine learning, it is possible to offer changes to the website design without altering the source code.

214This way, a website can be accessible to different types of users without the need to adjust the website for every accessibility equipment, accessible web applications, and WI-ARIA.

215For a web page to be accessible, all important semantics about the page's functionality must be available so that assistive technology can understand and process the content and adapt it for the user.

216However, as content becomes more and more complex, the standard HTML tags and attributes become inadequate in providing semantics reliably.

217Modern web applications often apply scripts to elements to control their functionality and to enable them to act as a control or other dynamic component.

218These custom components, or widgets, do not provide a way to convey semantic information to the user agent.

219WI-ARIA, Accessible Rich Internet Applications, is a specification published by the World Wide Web Consortium that specifies how to increase the accessibility of dynamic content and user interface components developed with AJAX, HTML, JavaScript, and related technologies.

220ARIA enables accessibility by enabling the author to provide all the semantics to fully describe its supported behavior.

221It also allows each element to expose its current states and properties and its relationships between other elements.

222Accessibility problems with the focus and tab index are also corrected.

223Neurological UX Neurological UX is a specialized branch of web accessibility aimed at designing digital experiences that cater to individuals with neurological dispositions such as ADHD, dyslexia, autism spectrum disorder, ASD, and anxiety.

224Coined by Gareth Slin in his book Neurological UX, NeurologicalUX.com, this approach goes beyond conventional accessibility by addressing cognitive, emotional, and behavioral needs.

225Neurological UX focuses on creating interfaces that reduce cognitive load, support diverse ways of thinking, and accommodate challenges in executive functioning.

226Core principles include clarity and simplicity, streamlining interfaces to reduce distractions and enhance focus for users with ADHD and similar conditions.

227Cognitive support, offering features like tooltips, hover states, or progressive disclosures to help users with memory and information processing challenges such as those with dyslexia or traumatic brain injuries.

228Emotionally comfortable design, using common color schemes, predictable navigation, and consistent layouts to reduce anxiety for users prone to stress.

229Flexible interaction models, providing adjustable settings for font size, spacing, and contrast to suit the needs of users with dyslexia, visual stress, or sensory processing disorders.

230Intuitive feedback, ensuring interactive elements provide clear, immediate feedback to accommodate difficulties with impulse control and decision making.

231Minimizing overstimulation, avoiding overly busy layouts, autoplay media, or complex animations that can overwhelm users with ASD or ADHD.

232By prioritizing usability and emotional well-being, Neurological UX seeks to create inclusive digital experiences that empower all users, regardless of their cognitive or neurological profile.

233This approach not only improves accessibility compliance, but also fosters a more equitable and human-centered web.

234This was the English Wikipedia article about web accessibility as of December 4, 2024, narrated by AI-generated voice via the open-source software Sony Translate.

235.

236.