Accessibility
Usable by everyone
is not a feature.
Roughly one in four adults has a disability. A site that is hard to use quietly turns away customers who were ready to buy. We design and remediate toward WCAG 2.2 AA as a default rather than an upgrade, and we test with keyboards and screen readers, not just automated tools.
Premise
Access and quality are the same problem.
Semantic markup, real contrast, sensible focus order, and honest labels make a site easier for screen readers, keyboards, older eyes, bright sunlight, and search engines — all at once.
Overlay widgets do none of that. We fix the page instead.
Scope
What an accessibility engagement covers.
- Audit against WCAG 2.2 AA, with automated testing and manual keyboard and screen-reader passes.
- Prioritized findings: what blocks customers today versus what should be improved next.
- Remediation: semantic structure, headings, landmarks, labels, alt text, and focus states.
- Color and contrast: a palette that stays on-brand and passes.
- Forms and interaction: error handling, announcements, and motion preferences respected.
- Documentation: a plain-language statement and guidance for your team.
Standard
Tested against WCAG 2.2 AA.
We work to WCAG 2.2 level AA, the benchmark most widely referenced in the US and required in public-sector procurement. We are not attorneys, we do not offer legal advice, and we do not promise legal outcomes: we design and remediate toward WCAG 2.2 AA and document the work clearly.
Questions
- Isn't an accessibility widget enough?
- No. Overlays sit on top of the underlying problems rather than fixing them. Correcting the markup is cheaper, more durable, and genuinely better to use.
- Will accessibility limit the design?
- It constrains contrast and interaction, not ambition. Every site we build is designed to be striking and accessible at the same time.
- Does it help SEO?
- Yes. Semantic headings, alt text, labels, and clear structure are exactly what search engines and AI assistants read.