Accessibility evaluation methodology

W3C encourages use of the latest WCAG 2 version. WCAG 2.2 is organized under perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust principles, with testable success criteria at A, AA, and AAA levels.

• Automated rules
• keyboard review
• screen-reader review
• zoom and reflow
• color and non-color meaning
• forms and errors
• authentication
• content and instructions
• task completion

A scan can identify failures and areas requiring review. A conformance claim requires evaluation of the applicable success criteria across the defined scope and remains the responsibility of the party making the claim.

• State the authorization, scope, exclusions, environment, timing, and methodology version for accessibility evaluation.
• Automated findings separated from issues requiring manual human evaluation.
• Distinguish direct observation, calculated result, heuristic, inference, and manual judgment.
• Preserve failed, incomplete, blocked, and uncertain checks instead of silently dropping them.

A methodology should help reviewers reach the same bounded conclusion from the same evidence. It should not imply certainty beyond the assessed scope. Record the finding, limitation, owner, decision, remediation, and the verification required to remove barriers from important user tasks and make accessibility part of routine website operations.

Apply this guidance to the actual website and operating context. For accessibility evaluation, preserve the source condition, affected scope, assumptions, responsible owner, implementation reference, and result so another reviewer can reproduce the decision.

The page is intended for customers, administrators, reviewers, and procurement teams. It supports a bounded decision, not a universal guarantee. Reassess the guidance when the website architecture, content, technology, contract, audience, or external requirements materially change.

• Define what successful accessibility evaluation means before implementation begins.
• Link the work to a ticket, release, approval, or retained project record.
• Schedule a follow-up check instead of assuming the condition will remain correct indefinitely.

Search visibility and user value improve when accessibility evaluation answers the real questions people bring to the page. For customers, administrators, reviewers, and procurement teams, that means covering the decision context, observable signals, implementation boundaries, and proof that the result works in production—not repeating a keyword or publishing a longer version of the same incomplete explanation.

Use the page as part of a connected topic cluster. Link the broad concept to focused implementation guides, definitions, checklists, examples, and the Asuruas workflow that can identify affected URLs. The goal is to help a reader move from discovery to a confident next action while giving search systems clear entities, relationships, and page purpose.

• Inspect keyboard and focus behavior.
• Inspect names, roles, labels, and instructions.
• Inspect heading, landmark, and reading order.
• Inspect contrast, motion, media, and error recovery.