October 2024

November 2024

December 2024

January 2025

February 2025

March 2025

April 2025

May 2025

June 2025

July 2025

August 2025

September 2025

October 2025

November 2025

December 2025

January 2026

Doetinchem

To comply with WCAG AA, the colour of text must sufficiently contrast with
its background color, so that people with moderate visual impairments can read it.

The [contrast ratio](https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html#contrast-ratiodef) 
must be at least 4.5:1 for body text, and 3:1 for large text.

A much more demanding version of this check (1.4.6) exists for WCAG AAA. Ignoring an issue in this check 
will also ignore it in that check, and vice versa.

aa-text-contrast

To comply with the strictest accessibility standard (WCAG AAA), the colour of text must 
strongly contrast with its background color, so that people with significant visual impairments 
can read it.

The [contrast ratio](https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html#contrast-ratiodef)
must be at least 7:1 for body text, and 4.5:1 for large text.

A far less demanding version of this check (1.4.3) exists for WCAG AA. All websites should aim to 
meet the easier AA standard at a minimum. The AAA standard is desirable but far more challenging,
and may not be practical for your website.

aaa-text-contrast

All `id` attributes on a page must be unique, or accessible technologies used by the page 
can stop working.

## Example

The duplicate `id` here makes it unclear which label belongs to which input field:

```html
<label for="name">Your name</label>
<input id="name">

<label for="name">Company name</label>
<input id="name">
```

As a result, accessible technologies like screen readers can fail to read out the 
correct text, or may read out no text at all.

Similar issues can occur when using `aria-labelledby` and `aria-describedby`.

## How to fix

Ensure all `id` attributes on a page are unique. 

## More information

See [Technique H93](https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/H93) 
for more information.

duplicate-id

All controls on the page - including links, buttons, and fields - should clearly 
indicate when they have been selected by the keyboard.

This is a stricter version of [WCAG 2.4.7](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/focus-visible.html),
which requires that the focus indicator is visible, but doesn't specify how clearly
it should be visible.

You can confirm this yourself by loading a webpage and using the Tab key to navigate 
through it. Anything you can select should clearly alter its appearance when selected. 
For example, a text field might change color, or have a distinctive border applied. 

## The requirements

The [official requirements](https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/focus-appearance.html) are 
complicated. A simplified version is:

* Surround the control with a solid outline
* The outline must have at least 3:1 contrast with its background
* The outline must have at least 3:1 contrast with its surroundings, or be at least 2px thick

The actual requirements allow for more variation, but generally require that you 
calculate the perimeter and/or area of the focus area, which can be very difficult.

## How to fix

Links and form controls should use a focus selector which contrasts with their
unfocused state, as well as any surroundings of the focus state. 

In practice, the easiest way to accomplish this is to use a two-color focus, like so:

```css
/* ensure high-contrast mode still has an indicator */
outline: 2px transparent solid;

/* Apply a thick yellow box-shadow with 
   a thin dark blue indicator in the middle */
box-shadow: 0 0 0 2px #F9F9D1, 0 0 0 4px #396196, 0 0 4px 8px #F9F9D1;
``` 

From [Technique C40](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C40).

Using two contrasting colors guarantees that the focus state will be visible, 
regardless of the background or surrounding colors.

## Troubleshooting

### Not enough contrasting pixels change

The [Success Criterion](https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/focus-appearance.html) specifies a minimum area 
for the contrasting portion of the focus indicator, which is equivalent to a 2 CSS pixel border around the component.

From the requirements:

> "The easiest and most common way to meet this requirement is to use a solid outline around the component. 
> The outline must be at least 2px thick."

In practice, many websites use alternatives to this, such as a thick border along one edge. A problem with 
that approach is it is often dependent upon the length of that one edge, which for text links can vary dynamically.

See [Sara Soueidan](https://www.sarasoueidan.com/blog/focus-indicators/#2.-minimum-contrasting-area) for a good
write-up of this concept.

To comply with this Success Criterion, we recommend adding a 2px border around all edges.

Note an earlier draft of this Success Criterion has a more generous allowance here, which is not the case for the
final version.

### Elements appear to change in the browser

Focus states should be defined in CSS alone, and not require JavaScript to work. 

Try disabling JavaScript on the page, and see if focus is still visible. If it not, 
then the focus state won't work with assistive technologies that don't have a physical
keyboard, e.g. mobile phones.

Some more unusual means of implementing a focus state cannot be detected or measured
automatically. These include:

* Focus implemented via pseudo-elements - such as `::after` or `::before`. 
* Focus using `:focus-within` (JavaScript current provides no way to access these).
* Focus cascaded to child elements, e.g. a `<span>` inside an `<a>` tag. We detect
  some of these cases, but there are variations that we cannot detect.

Currently, there is no practical way to assess these focus states automatically.

### Elements over images not analyzed

Silktide cannot assess the contrast of elements that are over images. This is because
the contrast of an element is calculated by comparing the color of the element with the
color of the background. 

If the element is over an image, the background color is the
color of the image, which varies from pixel-to-pixel, and may vary further as the page
is resized, due to responsive design.

### Unexpected elements are focusable

You may be surprised to see tags like `<div>` or `<span>` being shown as focusable.
If an element has a `tabindex` of 0 or higher, it becomes focusable. Any HTML tag can be made 
focusable in this way, this is so that custom controls (e.g. your own drop-down menus, or 
sliders) can support keyboard navigation. [Learn more about tabindex on MDN](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Global_attributes/tabindex).

## Further reading

* [WCAG 2.4.13](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/focus-appearance.html)
* [Minimum Contrasting Area explained (Sara Soueidan)](https://www.sarasoueidan.com/blog/focus-indicators/#2.-minimum-contrasting-area)

ensure-focus-appearance

When selecting a user interface component with the keyboard, the focus indicator must 
not be _partly_ obscured by anything in front of it. 

## Why this matters

When using a keyboard, it is important that the user can see where they are on the page.
If the focus indicator is obscured, the user may not know where they are, and may not
be able to interact with the page.

## Examples

Most common examples include:

* Banners at the top or bottom of the page, such as cookie banners
* Fixed navigation bars
* Fixed footers
* Popup modals, such as cookie consent modals

## Testing this manually

* Open the page
* Press the tab key to move focus through elements on the page
* Check that the focus indicator is not fully obscured by anything in front of it

## Comparison with Level AA version

This is the stricter (Level AAA) version of the Level AA check (2.4.11).

The Level AA version only flags issues where the focus indicator is _completely_ obscured, this
version flags issues where the focus indicator is _partly_ obscured.

## How to fix

With elements that cover part of the screen, such as cookie banners, ensure
that the user can scroll to see any content behind the banner, without having to close
the banner.

The two most very common solutions are:

1. Avoid the use of fixed elements that could obscure other elements
2. Use the CSS `scroll-margin` property (see [WCAG Technique C43](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C43))

With popup modals, it should usually be impossible to focus anything behind the modal.
Most common modal frameworks will automatically trap focus within the modal, so that
this is impossible. Example: [Bootstrap Modal](https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.2/components/modal/#live-demo).

## Methodology

1. Silktide simulates a keyboard user tabbing through the page
2. Silktide simulates the focused element being vertically scrolled into the center of the page
   (see 'Rationale for scrolling' below)
3. For each element that receives focus, Silktide checks that the focus indicator is not obscured
   by another element on top of it
4. If the focus indicator is obscured, Silktide raises an issue

### Rationale for scrolling

The rationale for point #2 (above) is worth expanding. At different screen sizes, the amount of scrolling
a browser makes between tabs will vary. For example, Chrome will typically avoid scrolling until a
focus element falls outside the current viewport, and then it will adopt the least amount of
scrolling possible to bring the element into view.

This means if you test a page in Silktide, and in a browser with a fractionally different height,
you may experience different elements being obscured or not, especially elements blocked by sticky headers
and footers. Every only a few pixels of difference in screen height can make a huge difference the
further down the page you go.

In all these cases, the use of user-directed vertical scrolling, e.g. via the cursor keys, would permit
the focused element to be seen. Whether that would be necessary would depend on the exact browser and
size of the browser viewport.

Silktide purposely adopts a generous frame here, to avoid flagging issues which might only affect the
exact screen size that it tested. In our testing, when we didn't do this, the number of subjectively false
positives could be very high, and extremely confusing, as they would not replicate during manual testing on
anything but the exact same browser size.

Essentially, Silktide chooses not to flag issues which _could_ affect some very particular screen sizes
_inconsistently_, but it will flag issues that should affect _all_ screen sizes consistently.

The W3C does not specify how to test this Success Criterion.

### Simulating conditional modals

Silktide adopts additional behavior to simulate the use of dialog modals that may be opened by user
behavior after a page loads (i.e. modals that don't automatically open when a page loads).

If a non-opened modal is detected, Silktide assumes that _elements outside the modal cannot be focused_.
This is not guaranteed, but it is impossible for Silktide to predict the behavior of a modal that has not
yet been opened, and this is much more accurate than assuming that the modal does not constrain focus.

As a result, a modal which is incorrectly programmed (i.e. doesn't constrain focus) may not be detected
as obscuring focus behind it, if the modal is not opened by default.

## Further reading

* [WCAG 2.4.12](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/focus-not-obscured-enhanced)
* [WCAG Technique C43 - Using CSS margin and scroll-margin to un-obscure content](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C43)

ensure-focus-is-not-obscured-enhanced

When selecting a user interface component with the keyboard, the focus indicator must 
not be _completely obscured_ by anything in front of it.

## Why this matters

When using a keyboard, it is important that the user can see where they are on the page.
If the focus indicator is obscured, the user may not know where they are, and may not
be able to interact with the page.

## Examples

Most common examples include:

* Banners at the top or bottom of the page, such as cookie banners
* Fixed navigation bars
* Fixed footers
* Popup modals, such as cookie consent modals

## Testing this manually

* Open the page
* Press the tab key to move focus through elements on the page
* Check that the focus indicator is not fully obscured by anything in front of it

## Comparison with Level AAA version

This is the less strict (Level AA) version of the Level AAA check (2.4.12).

This Level AA version only flags issues where the focus indicator is _completely_ obscured, the
Level AAA version flags issues where the focus indicator is _partly_ obscured.

## How to fix

With elements that cover part of the screen, such as cookie banners, ensure
that the user can scroll to see any content behind the banner, without having to close
the banner.

The two most very common solutions are:

1. Avoid the use of fixed elements that could obscure other elements
2. Use the CSS `scroll-margin` property (see [WCAG Technique C43](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C43)) 

With popup modals, it should usually be impossible to focus anything behind the modal.
Most common modal frameworks will automatically trap focus within the modal, so that
this is impossible. Example: [Bootstrap Modal](https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.2/components/modal/#live-demo).

## Methodology

1. Silktide simulates a keyboard user tabbing through the page
2. Silktide simulates the focused element being vertically scrolled into the center of the page
   (see 'Rationale for scrolling' below)
3. For each element that receives focus, Silktide checks that the focus indicator is not obscured
   by another element on top of it
4. If the focus indicator is obscured, Silktide raises an issue

### Rationale for scrolling

The rationale for point #2 (above) is worth expanding. At different screen sizes, the amount of scrolling 
a browser makes between tabs will vary. For example, Chrome will typically avoid scrolling until a
focus element falls outside the current viewport, and then it will adopt the least amount of 
scrolling possible to bring the element into view.

This means if you test a page in Silktide, and in a browser with a fractionally different height, 
you may experience different elements being obscured or not, especially elements blocked by sticky headers 
and footers. Every only a few pixels of difference in screen height can make a huge difference the 
further down the page you go.

In all these cases, the use of user-directed vertical scrolling, e.g. via the cursor keys, would permit 
the focused element to be seen. Whether that would be necessary would depend on the exact browser and
size of the browser viewport.

Silktide purposely adopts a generous frame here, to avoid flagging issues which might only affect the 
exact screen size that it tested. In our testing, when we didn't do this, the number of subjectively false
positives could be very high, and extremely confusing, as they would not replicate during manual testing on
anything but the exact same browser size.

Essentially, Silktide chooses not to flag issues which _could_ affect some very particular screen sizes 
_inconsistently_, but it will flag issues that should affect _all_ screen sizes consistently.

The W3C does not specify how to test this Success Criterion.

### Simulating conditional modals

Silktide adopts additional behavior to simulate the use of dialog modals that may be opened by user
behavior after a page loads (i.e. modals that don't automatically open when a page loads).

If a non-opened modal is detected, Silktide assumes that _elements outside the modal cannot be focused_.
This is not guaranteed, but it is impossible for Silktide to predict the behavior of a modal that has not
yet been opened, and this is much more accurate than assuming that the modal does not constrain focus.

As a result, a modal which is incorrectly programmed (i.e. doesn't constrain focus) may not be detected 
as obscuring focus behind it, if the modal is not opened by default.

## Further reading

* [WCAG 2.4.11](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/focus-not-obscured-minimum)
* [WCAG Technique C43 - Using CSS margin and scroll-margin to un-obscure content](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C43)

ensure-focus-is-not-obscured-minimum

All interactive components on a page, such as buttons or menus, should be far enough apart 
from other interactive areas, to avoid them being used by mistake. 

This ensures people with motor impairments can easily click or tap on the right element.

## How to fix

* Ensure all interactive elements are at least 24 CSS pixels wide and tall
* OR ensure there is at least 24 CSS pixels (minus the width and height of the element)
  between each interactive element

## Methodology

This check is run on both the mobile and desktop versions of every page. Results
for each may differ.

1. All interactive elements are identified, including buttons, links, and form controls.
2. If an element is not normally visible, it is ignored. This includes elements which
   are positioned offscreen or cropped (e.g. for 'screen-reader only' text).
3. If an element is larger than 24 CSS pixels in both dimensions, it passes.
4. Otherwise, the element is compared to all other elements on the page.
5. The minimum horizontal gap between the element is calculated as 24 CSS pixels,  
   minus the width of the element.
6. The minimum vertical gap between the element is calculated as 24 CSS pixels,  
   minus the height of the element.
7. If another element falls within the minimum horizontal or vertical gap, the 
   element fails, unless both are links that point to the same place.

## Further reading

* [Target Size (Minimum)](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/target-size-minimum.html)
* [Technique C42 - Using min-height and min-width to ensure sufficient target spacing](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C42)

ensure-minimum-target-size

All interactive components on a page, such as buttons or fields, should ideally be large enough 
to be easily used by people with motor impairments. 

This ensures people with motor impairments can easily click or tap on the element.

The recommended size is 44 x 44 CSS pixels, with some exceptions:

* **Equivalent available** - the functionality provided by
  the control is available elsewhere, and large enough, on the same page.
* **Inline text** - the control appears inside a sentence or block of text. 
* **User Agent control** - the size of the target is determined by the user agent 
  and is not modified by the author. Generally this is not the case for web content.
* **Essential** - the size of the target is essential to the information being conveyed,
  e.g. a tutorial demonstrating what a small button looks like. This exception is rare.

## Applying this check

Nearly all websites will fail this check by default. The minimum size requirement
is larger than most links and controls on most websites.

This is the much stricter version of the WCAG 2.2 AA check for target size. Most websites
should focus on the AA check before considering this AAA check:

* [Target Size (Minimum)](https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/target-size-minimum.html)

## Methodology

This check is run on both the mobile and desktop versions of every page. Results
for each may differ.

1. All interactive elements are identified, including buttons, links, and form controls. 
2. If an element is preceded or followed directly by a non-empty text node, the control
   is ignored.
3. If an element is not normally visible, it is ignored. This includes elements which 
   are positioned offscreen or cropped (e.g. for 'screen-reader only' text).
4. If an element is a link, and another visible link on the page points to the same URL, with 
   that other link meeting the size requirements, the element is ignored.
5. Otherwise, the element must have a minimum size of 44 x 44 CSS pixels.

## Troubleshooting

Silktide only records the first 100 instances of a failure on a page. Because failures
of this check are common, it is possible that your page has more than 100 failures, but
only the first 100 will be shown.

## Further reading

* [Target Size (Enhanced)](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/target-size-enhanced)

ensure-reasonable-target-size

Lists of related items should be written [semantically](https://html.com/semantic-markup/) as a 
list.

Usually this means rewriting these to use the `<ul>` or `<ol>` tags.

This allows assistive technologies to more easily navigate from item to
item, or past entire groups of links if the user wants to. 

## Examples 

### Navigation

This navigation:

```html
<a href="/about">About us</a>
<a href="/products">Products</a>
<a href="/contact">Contact us</a>
```

Should be rewritten as a list:

```html
<ul>
  <li><a href="/about">About us</a></li>
  <li><a href="/products">Products</a></li>
  <li><a href="/contact">Contact us</a></li>
</ul>
```

### Tables for content

This single-column table is redundant. There is no
value in placing the content in a table, which makes
it harder for screen reader users to interpret and interact
with.

```html
<table>
  <tr>
    <td>
      Banana
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>
      Apple
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>
      Pear
    </td>
  </tr>
</table>
```

Should be rewritten as a list:

```html
<ul>
  <li>Banana</li>
  <li>Apple</li>
  <li>Pear</li>
</ul>
```

## Justification

Users of assistive technologies, like screen readers, can skip an entire
list in one step. In some cases, they can even search inside a list. 

These aids are not available where links are written outside a list. 
Failing to use lists correctly can force users to have to step through
hundreds of items one at a time.

## Methodology

1. Any single-column tables are automatically considered 
   redundant lists. 
2. For non-table elements, recursively work down the page looking inside
   each element for links separated by minimal amounts of non-link text. 
   If the non-link text is below 30 characters 
   in length, we assume we're inside content that should be a list.
   Some exceptions are made, e.g. the presence of an `<hr>` would break
   out of the list.

## More information

See [Technique
H48](https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/H48) for
details.

mark-navigation-section-as-list

Form controls must appear sufficiently distinct from their surroundings, so that people 
with visual impairments are still able to clearly see them.    

Either the border or the form control itself must have a 3:1 colour contrast with the 
surrounding area. 

## Methodology

* All `<input>`, `<textarea>`, and `<select>` elements are checked.
* For `<input>` elements, these types are ignored as their
  appearance is controlled by the browser or operating system:
  `checkbox`, `radio`, `submit`, `reset`, `image`, `hidden`, `file`. 
* The flattened background color of the control is determined. This is the color of the
  control itself, combined with any parent elements if the control is transparent.
* If the control has a border or outline:
  * The flattened background color of each edge is determined. 
    This is the color of the edge itself, combined with any parent elements
    if the edge is transparent.
  * If any edge has sufficient contrast with the flattened background color of the control, 
    the control is considered to have sufficient contrast.
* If the control does not have a border or outline:
  * The flattened background color of the surrounding 
    area is determined. This is the color of the first control's parent element which is at least 
    one pixel larger around the element in every dimension, i.e. above, below, left, and right.
  * If the background color of the element has sufficient contrast with surrounding area color
    the control is considered to have sufficient contrast.

## Troubleshooting

There are some limitations to the contrast checker:

* The use of drop shadows, glowing effects, gradients, and other complex effects 
  mean there is no one clear color to determine the contrast ratio against. 
  In these cases, the contrast ratio cannot currently be determined.
* It is possible for an element to be positioned over multiple elements, e.g. via
  `position: absolute` or `position: fixed`. In this case, the contrast ratio cannot 
  currently be determined.

## Further reading

* [WCAG 1.4.11](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/non-text-contrast.html)

non-text-contrast

wcag-22.score

wcag-22-a.score

wcag-22-aa.score

wcag-22-aaa.score

website.pages

website.documents

Forms should always contain a submit button, otherwise some people using
accessible technologies may not be able to submit the form.

Submit buttons are `<input>` elements with a type attribute of `submit` or
`image`, or `<button>` elements with type `submit`.

## Rationale 

Many users expect to be able to press enter in a form to submit it. However,
this is not always possible.

Users of some assistive technologies may (depending on the technology) only
be able to press a button to submit the form. In the absence of a submit
button, the user may not be able to submit the form.

In addition, the absence of a submit button suggests that the form may 
provide an automatic 'change of context', i.e. major change to the user 
interface without the user choosing to do so. This can be highly disorientating
to some users.

## Methodology

* All `<form>` elements on the page are tested separately.
* Check whether the <form> contains any of the following elements, and that the elements are visible
  when the page first loads:
  * `<input>`
  * `<textarea>`
  * `<checkbox>`
  * `<select>`
  * `<button>`
* If the form contains any of the above elements, then it is considered to
  need a submit button. If a submit button is missing, then a failure is reported.

### Field visibility check

The check for field visibility (above) is designed to ignore forms which perform functions not normally
associated with user interaction, such as tracking code, or ASPX forms which wrap every page 
but which don't contain any interactive elements. These are common potential false positives.

A trade-off here is that some forms may be invisible when a page loads, and later revealed to
a user following some interaction. If these are missing a submit button, Silktide will not detect them.
In practice, this false negative is far less likely than the false positive this prevents. 

## Further reading

* [WCAG 3.2.2 - On Input](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/on-input.html)
* [Technique H32](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H32.html)

form-submit-required

Screen reader users will see links on a page listed without context, 
so you should ensure the same link text is not used to point to different web
addresses.

For example:

```html
<p>
    Learn the latest about our products: 
    <a href="/products/news">News</a>
</p>

<p>
    Learn the latest about our services: 
    <a href="/company/news">News</a>
</p>
``` 

To a screen reader who is listing links, they will only hear:

* News
* News

These links appear to be the same, but they both behave differently. 
One solution, which doesn't require the page design to change, is to add an 
`aria-label` for each link:

```html
<p>
    Learn the latest about our products: 
    <a href="/products/news" aria-label="Product news">News</a>
</p>

<p>
    Learn the latest about our services: 
    <a href="/company/news" aria-label="Company news">News</a>
</p>
``` 

Which will be heard as:

* Product news
* Company news

To pass this checkpoint, make sure that links which point to different pages 
have distinct text inside them, or that they specify ARIA labels (`aria-labelledby` or
`aria-label`), or they use hidden text only visible to screen readers
(e.g. `<span class="sr-only">...</span>`) to distinguish them from each 
other.

If links point to the same page (e.g., they redirect or use tracking
parameters, but are functionally equivalent to the user) you can ignore
this issue.

a-duplicate-link-text-for-different-destinations

Most content should be written so people with a lower secondary level of education can understand it.
Where this is not possible, supplemental content or an alternative version should be provided.

This check highlights pages with a reading age of 16 years or higher. Only pages with at least 100 words
of content (excluding navigation, footers, etc) are considered.  

For more information, see [WCAG SC 3.1.5](https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/meaning-supplements.html).

ensure-reading-ability-is-not-advanced

When viewed on small screens (like mobile phones) content must fit without 
requiring scrolling in two dimensions.

WCAG 2.1 specifically requires this for:

+ Vertical scrolling content at a width equivalent to 320 CSS pixels
+ Horizontal scrolling content at a height equivalent to 256 CSS pixels

Except for parts of the content which require two-dimensional layout for usage or meaning,
such as a maps application.

two-dimensional-scrolling

Two adjacent links should not point to the same destination. You almost always want to combine the 
two links.

For example, it is quite common to link an image and text together like this:

```html
<a href="news.html">
    <img src="photo.jpg" alt="" />
</a>
<a href="news.html">
    News
</a>
``` 

These adjacent links should be combined like so:

```html
<a href="news.html">
    <img src="photo.jpg" alt="" />
    News
</a>
``` 

Links to `#` are ignored, as these are nearly always placeholders for JavaScript, e.g.:

```html
<a href="#" onclick="approve()">
    OK
</a>
<a href="#" onclick="reject()">
    Cancel
</a>
```

# Justification

Many users of assistive technology are only able to experience content sequentially - that is, they must
step through each part of the page, one part at a time. Often this is a slow process, potentially 
hampered by a physical impediment.

Stepping through redundant links is time consuming; for example users of a screen reader must 
hear each link read aloud in turn. 

This also simplifies your code. 

# Methodology

1. Find all links (`<a>` tags) on the page.
2. Ignore links pointing to `#`, as these are usually placeholders for JavaScript.
3. Flag links which are (a) separated only by whitespace and (b) which point to the 
   same absolute URL.  

# Learn more

Read about [Technique H2](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H2) on how to combine
an adjacent image and texts links.

Priority	Recommendation	Progress
	Ensure controls clearly indicate when they are selected WCAG 2.2 AAA 2.4.13	20.7%
	Ensure form controls contrast sufficiently with their surroundings WCAG 2.1 AA 1.4.11	44.7%
	Ensure focus is not fully obscured WCAG 2.2 AA 2.4.11	95.6%
	Write lists or groups of links semantically WCAG 2.0 A 1.3.1	2%
	Fix duplicate IDs WCAG 2.0 A 4.1.1	0%

Doetinchem

Accessibility

WCAG Levels

Recommendations

The best free accessibility checker