How we evaluate accessibility (FAQ)

Manual vs automated testing

There are numerous automated testing tools available online. In practice, even the most sophisticated of these can reliably identify around 30% of success criteria, while also producing a large number of both false negative and false positive findings. We carry out all our testing manually, making effective use of certain automated tools as part of what's known as semi-automated checking. So is automated testing pointless? Not at all – we recommend that our clients set up automated testing and use it to check their entire website regularly. This helps catch any shortcomings in newly published content or identify content that has become outdated.

What's the difference between simplified and in-depth testing?

In simplified testing, we test the homepage and selected content that the homepage links to at the first level. This isn't a comprehensive audit, but a quick and effective initial assessment of the accessibility of the site or service in question. We also carry out this testing manually, because even here we focus on real-world accessibility for all groups of users with disabilities. The resulting report lists the WCAG success criteria that are violated, together with the first example found of each violation. It doesn't include a suggested way of fixing these violations. Where a given success criterion is violated more than once, only the first or a typical example of the violation is given.

Do you also need to test compliance with EN 301 549? Aren't the WCAG success criteria enough?

EN 301 549 v. 3.2.1 incorporates all the WCAG 2.1 success criteria, but it also adds its own requirements and specifies exactly which success criteria apply to websites, mobile applications, hardware and other software.

For state and public administration bodies, the legislation in force across the EU – and therefore in Slovakia too – requires compliance with the EN 301 549 v. 3.2.1 standard. For the private sector, this standard applies only to websites, mobile applications and non-web documents (PDF, DOCX, XLSX, PPTX…).

For hardware and other software, this standard isn't explicitly referenced in the legislation, but it's recommended as the technical standard for ensuring the accessibility of digital products and services. It's set by the European standardisation bodies for electrotechnology (CEN, CENELEC and ETSI) and is used as a reference framework for meeting the requirements of anti-discrimination legislation and the accessibility directive.

So testing against WCAG alone isn't enough, although for websites or text documents, for example, the difference between testing against WCAG 2.1 at levels A and AA and testing against EN 301 549 v. 3.2.1 is minimal.

No. If you also provide a mobile application, it needs its own accessibility statement on each platform. Likewise, if you provide services on different domains or separate websites, each of them should have its own accessibility statement.

Why don't we offer a tool that automatically makes a site/document/app accessible?

Such tools exist (so-called overlays), but we don't recommend purchasing or implementing them, and nor does the European Commission through its Web Accessibility Directive Expert Group. The reason is that they only target specific types of disability and can't guarantee full compliance with legislative requirements. They force a particular assistive technology on users, who can't then choose their own, so the real impact on accessibility is marginal and limited to some users only. Over time, the cost of such a solution far exceeds the cost of genuinely making a website accessible, which – besides practical accessibility for everyone – also delivers better usability, has a positive effect on SEO and, of course, ensures compliance with the legislation.

Do we use artificial intelligence (AI)?

Artificial intelligence (AI) is finding growing application in accessibility, particularly as an effective assistive technology for certain groups of users with disabilities (people with visual or hearing impairments, and to a lesser extent those with motor limitations). Work is still ongoing to find ways AI can help, for example, people with cognitive disabilities. Today, artificial intelligence can significantly help with, for example, OCR and tagging (applying accessibility tags) in PDF documents, although the results still require manual correction. AI can also be used to generate captions or an automated transcript of audio recordings or broadcasts. In this area, we can propose and present the optimal solutions for your specific situation. We closely monitor developments in artificial intelligence, and whenever new, effective tools become available, we're ready to test them and incorporate them into our workflow, or offer them to our clients.

What we guarantee

We guarantee the accuracy of our findings as well as the compliance of our proposed solutions. Accessibility statements are guaranteed as of the date they were prepared. In the event of a dispute, we can prepare an expert opinion for our clients. If it is found that we made an error in our conclusions, our client is entitled to a refund. Responsibility for the accessibility of published content rests with the client.