October 2024

November 2024

December 2024

January 2025

February 2025

March 2025

April 2025

May 2025

June 2025

July 2025

Terneuzen

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

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.

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

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.

## 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

This is part of the draft WCAG 2.2 specification and is subject to change.

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

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

An image with empty alternative text (e.g. `<img alt="">`) should not specify a 
`title` attribute, or if specified, the `title` should be empty.

For example, this is invalid:

```html
<img src="apple.png" alt="" title="This is an apple">
```

img-with-empty-alt-but-has-title

Do not link to an anchor on the page that does not exist. For example:
linking to `#content` without a valid destination such as `<body id="content"></body>`.

A common web design pattern is to use a named anchor to show an element via JavaScript, e.g.

```html
<a href="#foo" onclick="$('.bar').toggle();">Click me</a>
<div class="bar">
    This is some content.
</div>
``` 

In these cases, the anchor (`#foo`) should point to the `id` of the hidden element:

```html
<a href="#foo" onclick="$('#foo').toggle();">Click me</a>
<div id="foo">
    This is some content.
</div>
```

This way the semantic intent of the link is preserved, even without JavaScript. 
Note that doing so may require modification to your script, to prevent automatic 
scrolling to the named anchor.

linking-to-anchor-on-page-that-does-not-exist

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

Bookmarks (also known as outline entries) should be applied to long PDFs to 
provide a hierarchical overview of the document to help aid navigation. 

WCAG guidelines do not specify how many pages are required to be classified as a 
long PDF. Because of this Silktide treats PDFs of 21 or more pages as long. 
This matches [Adobe Acrobat](https://helpx.adobe.com/acrobat/using/create-verify-pdf-accessibility.html?trackingid=KACNN#Bookmarks) 
interpretation.  

See [WCAG](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/pdf.html#PDF2) for advice.

pdf-long-document-requires-bookmarks

PDFs should have a default document language set to help render text accurately and help screen readers pronounce words correctly. 
See [WCAG](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/pdf.html#PDF16) for reference.

pdf-missing-default-language

PDF files should have headings.
 See [WCAG](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/pdf.html#PDF9)

pdf-missing-headings

PDFs need to be tagged in a valid reading order for accessibility. See [Adobe's guide](https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/acrobat/using/creating-accessible-pdfs.html#tag_the_pdf) and [WCAG](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/pdf.html#PDF3) for advice.

pdf-must-be-tagged

All PDFs must define a valid title. This must not be confused with the file name. 
See [PDF 18](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/PDF18.html) for details.

pdf-no-title

All PDFs must define a descriptive title. 
See [PDF 18](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/PDF18.html) for details.

pdf-weak-title

wcag-22.score

wcag-22-a.score

wcag-22-aa.score

wcag-22-aaa.score

website.pages

website.documents

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.

duplicate-adjacent-link

Headings in a PDF should follow the sequence Heading 1 > Heading 2 > Heading 3 without skipping intermediate headings.

It is acceptable to 'go back' to previous styles/headings but the sequence should then continue without missing headings.

See [WCAG](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/pdf.html#PDF9)

pdf-headings-order

Links must be defined in a specific way to be accessed by screen readers, which are used by 
blind and the partially-sighted.

To work with accessibility technologies, links must contain both machine-readable text, and 
a `href` attribute. If a link is not actually
pointing to a page or part of a page, it should be replaced with another semantic element, such
as a `button`, or the `<a>` tag should have a role of `button`. 

For example:

```html
<a href="/about">About us</a>
```

If the link contains _nothing but an image_, that image should specify alternative text, e.g.

```html
<a href="/apple">
    <img src="apple.png" alt="Apple">
</a>
```

Before HTML5, an anchor was often used to create a target to link to, e.g.

```html
<a name="example"></a>
```

This is not supported in HTML5, and the use of anchors for targets is discouraged. Use an `id`
attribute on a non-anchor tag instead, e.g.

```html
<div id="example"> ... </div>
```

Empty links (e.g. `<a></a>`) are often incorrectly used for buttons or controls in a
JavaScript application. In these cases, you should usually define the link as having a more appropriate
role, e.g. as a button. To do this, use the `role` attribute (e.g `<a role="button">`), or replace 
the `<a>` tag with a more appropriate tag, such as `<button>`.

For more details, see [Technique H91](https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/H91)
and learn about [ARIA roles](https://www.sitepoint.com/how-to-use-aria-effectively-with-html5/).

bad-anchor

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

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

This is default behavior for all standard web controls, and so if this issue is appearing
it is because this default behavior has been disabled. Or alternatively, if you have written
your own custom controls, these will need styling to support focus states.

## How to fix

Links and form controls typically define an `outline` CSS style, which ensures
they are highlighted automatically, for example:

```css
input:focus (outline: 2px solid red);
``` 

If you choose to override or disable the default `outline`, you should specify an accessible 
alternative, such as a border or background color.

### 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.

### 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 2.4.7](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/focus-visible.html)

Priority	Recommendation	Progress
	Ensure controls clearly indicate when they are selected WCAG 2.2 AAA 2.4.13	0%
	Ensure interactive components are far enough apart WCAG 2.2 AA 2.5.8	3.6%
	Tag all PDFs WCAG 2.0 A 1.3.1	58.3%
	Write lists or groups of links semantically WCAG 2.0 A 1.3.1	4%
	Ensure PDFs have a title WCAG 2.0 A 2.4.2	75%

Terneuzen

Accessibility

WCAG Levels

Recommendations

The best free accessibility checker