Digital Marketing Tips and Strategies to Grow Your Business

Build Accessible Iframes That Work for Everyone
Frames have a messy reputation in web accessibility. Classic <frameset> and <frame> elements broke layouts, confused screen readers, and were finally deprecated in HTML5. Their modern successor—the humble <iframe>—is still very much alive, powering everything from video embeds to checkout widgets. Yet accessible iframes can introduce their own barriers when titles are missing, keyboard focus gets trapped, or content can’t resize.

If you care about delivering inclusive, standards‑compliant code, you don’t have to ditch iframes altogether—you just need to implement them thoughtfully. This guide walks you through the evolution of frames, the accessibility pitfalls of iframes, and the best practices that help every user interact with embedded content smoothly.

Why Accessibility Still Matters for Embedded Content

Accessible design is good design. Clear labeling, keyboard‑friendly navigation, and responsive layouts benefit everyone—especially shoppers using screen readers, people who enlarge fonts, or users browsing on small devices. Taking a little extra time to make your accessible iframes also reduces legal risk and improves SEO by keeping your markup clean and semantic. In short: a well‑built iframe keeps users engaged and protects your brand.

A Quick History of Frames (and Why They Were Retired)

In the late 1990s, developers used <frameset> and <frame> to split a browser window into scrollable panes. Cool at the time—frustrating in practice. Search engines struggled to index framed sites, URLs didn’t reflect the visible page, and assistive technologies couldn’t provide meaningful navigation cues. By the time HTML5 rolled around, frames were officially removed from the specification.

Where Iframes Fit Today

The <iframe> element solved many of the old headaches by embedding external documents inside the current page without breaking browser history or URLs. Developers rely on iframes for:
- Video and audio players
- Social media timelines
- Interactive maps
- Payment widgets
- Analytics dashboards
While the element itself is valid in HTML5, browser and assistive‑tech support varies depending on how you configure it. Screen readers, for example, announce the title of an iframe, then treat its contents as part of the main document—so a poorly labeled or keyboard‑unfriendly iframe becomes an instant roadblock.

Best Practices for Accessible Iframes

Give Every Iframe a Descriptive Title

Screen readers announce the title attribute before loading iframe content. A short, meaningful label tells users what to expect and helps them decide whether to enter the frame.
```
<iframe
  src="product-demo.html"
  title= "Product Demonstration Video">
</iframe>
```
This small addition satisfies WCAG 2.1 Success Criterion 4.1.2, which requires that every interactive element have a programmatically determinable name and role.

Keep Keyboard Navigation Intuitive

Users should be able to tab into an iframe, move through its interactive elements, and tab out without getting trapped. Test with only your keyboard:
1. Press Tab until focus enters the iframe.
2. Navigate its internal controls with Tab, Shift + Tab, and arrow keys.
3. Confirm you can exit the iframe and continue through the rest of the page.
Avoid blanket tabindex= "-1" values unless you intentionally want to remove an element from the tab order. If the embedded content comes from a third party, advocate for keyboard support or consider a different provider.

Maintain a Logical Heading Structure

Many screen‑reader users jump by headings. If your main page begins with <h1> then <h2>, the iframe shouldn’t suddenly start with another <h1>—that’s like slipping a spare title page into a novel. Match the heading level to the surrounding hierarchy and keep it consistent:
```

<h2>Customer Reviews</h2>
<iframe
  src= "reviews.html"
  title= "Latest Customer Reviews">
</iframe>

<h3 id="reviews-heading">Latest Customer Reviews</h3>
```
Let the Browser Handle Scrolling

Setting scrolling="no" or hiding overflow might make your layout tidier, but it hurts users who zoom text or rely on larger fonts. Leave scrolling to the browser unless you have a specific, accessible iframes alternative.

Embrace Responsive Iframes

Hard‑coded widths and heights break on small screens and large zoom levels. Use relative units or CSS that scales with its container:
```
<iframe
  src="store-locator.html"
  title= "Store Locator Map"
  style="width: 100%; height: 400px; border: 0;">
</iframe>
```
If you need a flexible height for dynamic content, explore the resize event or IntersectionObserver to adjust height programmatically—just be sure any script changes don’t steal keyboard focus.

Hide Decorative or Redundant Iframes

Sometimes you embed content that adds visual flair but no real information—say, a decorative animation. In that case, keep it out of the accessibility tree with aria-hidden= "true":
```
<iframe
  src="confetti-animation.html"
  title= "Decorative animation"
  aria-hidden= "true">
</iframe>
```
Hidden frames remain in the DOM for sighted users but won’t distract assistive‑tech users with irrelevant announcements.

When to Skip Accessible Iframes Altogether

Modern CSS and JavaScript let you load external content without the iframe overhead. Consider:
- Server‑side includes to pull fragments directly into your HTML.
- fetch() + DOM injection for dynamic widgets (with proper sanitization).
- Progressive Web App patterns for seamless, app‑like experiences.
These approaches often improve SEO, simplify styling, and remove the focus‑management headaches that come with nested browsing contexts.

Testing Your Work

Automated scanners like Lighthouse and WAVE spot missing titles, keyboard traps, and contrast issues quickly. But true confidence comes from hands‑on tests:
1. Screen reader run‑through — Use NVDA on Windows or VoiceOver on macOS. Listen for the iframe title, navigate inside, then move back out.
2. Keyboard‑only tour — Unplug your mouse. Can you tab to every control, activate it, and proceed?
3. Zoom and reflow — Increase text size to 200 percent or zoom the browser. Does the iframe stay readable and scrollable?
If something feels awkward or blocks progress, iterate until the experience is as smooth as the rest of your site.

Wrapping Up

Accessible iframes aren’t about flashy code—they’re about giving every visitor a clear path to your content:
- Describe each iframe with a short, helpful title.
- Ensure keyboard users can enter, navigate, and exit effortlessly.
- Keep heading levels logical and scrolling natural.
- Use responsive sizing and hide purely decorative frames.
- Test with real assistive technology and people whenever possible.
Ready to audit your site’s iframes—or any other accessibility concern? 216digital can help. Schedule an ADA‑compliance briefing with our team, and let’s make sure every part of your web experience works for everyone who lands on it.

Because inclusive code isn’t a luxury—it’s the standard today’s web deserves.
Greg McNeil

May 19, 2025

How-to Guides

Accessibility, How-to, iframe, videos and audio content, Website Accessibility
Mobile Form Accessibility: Don’t Leave Users Behind
Think about how often you reach for your phone during the day—checking messages, ordering lunch, paying bills, or dashing through a quick form. Now picture each tap, swipe, and pinch becoming a chore because the form wasn’t built with you in mind.Unfortunately, that’s exactly what happens when mobile form accessibility is overlooked for users who rely on screen readers. A few missteps can turn routine tasks into roadblocks. Fixing those gaps keeps everyone’s day moving smoothly—and yes, it makes your product look a whole lot better, too.

As developers, we’re in a sweet spot to clear those hurdles. Instead of ticking boxes on an accessibility checklist, let’s swap ideas and code snippets that make forms genuinely easy to use. Think of this guide as one dev handing a helpful note to another—no lecture, just practical tips that work in the real world.

The Real Challenge of Mobile Accessibility

Roughly 90 percent of screen-reader users browse the web primarily on phones. Yet mobile form accessibility still slips past many reviews. Small oversights—poorly labeled fields, keyboards that bury inputs—can shut people out of shopping carts or log-in screens. Sure, standards like WCAG 2.2 and the European Accessibility Act (EAA) are important, but the endgame is simpler: make everyday online chores painless for everyone.

Common Barriers with Mobile Form Accessibility

So, what trips us up when we build (or tune-up) a mobile form? Here are the heavy hitters that screen-reader users run into—and how to dodge them.

Invisible Text Fields

Fields can look fine on the surface yet be missing their behind-the-scenes links. When labels and inputs aren’t wired together in code, a screen reader can’t announce them—and the user can’t fill them out.

Quick fix:
```
<label for="email">Email Address</label>
<input type="email" id="email" name="email">
```
Skip placeholder-only labels or fancy <div> stand-ins. Semantic HTML or precise ARIA labels keep everything on the radar.

Keyboard Blocking Form Fields

We’ve all watched the on-screen keyboard sail up and hide half the page. For screen-reader users, that’s a full stop.

A simple JavaScript nudge:
```
window.addEventListener('resize', () => {
  document.activeElement.scrollIntoView({ behavior: 'smooth' });
});
```
Let the layout flex so active inputs stay visible, and avoid fixed-position elements that trap content under the keyboard.

Unexpected Focus Shifts

Nothing’s more disorienting than the cursor jumping to a random field—or disappearing altogether—mid-form. Auto-focus tricks or live-updating content can make matters worse.

Rules of thumb:
- Only auto-focus when it truly helps.
- Deep dynamic changes to a minimum while someone is typing.
- Always leave users sure of their spot in the form.
Practical Steps to Improve Mobile Form Accessibility

Now that we’ve walked through the most common pitfalls, let’s talk solutions. Fixing mobile form accessibility doesn’t always mean starting from scratch—small, thoughtful adjustments can make a big difference. The goal here isn’t perfection on paper; it’s creating an experience that works reliably for real people on real devices. Below are key practices that help bring your forms up to speed.

Proper Labeling Is Crucial

Each form field should have a clear, programmatic label. Screen readers depend on these labels to describe inputs accurately. Relying solely on visual styling or placeholder text often leads to confusion or missed information. Whenever possible, use semantic HTML elements like <label> to ensure clarity and consistency.

Design with Keyboard Visibility in Mind

If the keyboard hides your input field, you’re forcing users to guess where they are. This isn’t just frustrating—it can stop someone from completing the form entirely. Design responsively to account for different screen sizes and input methods. Test with your device’s keyboard visible and active. Elements should remain fully accessible without awkward scrolling or zooming.

Maintain a Logical Navigation Order

Users often navigate mobile forms using swipe gestures or the Tab key with external keyboards. If your form jumps from field to field out of order—or skips elements entirely—you’ve just introduced an unnecessary obstacle. Use logical DOM ordering and avoid layout tricks that confuse the natural tab order.

Use Semantic HTML First, ARIA Thoughtfully

Native HTML elements offer built-in accessibility that ARIA can’t always replicate. For example, a standard <button> is more robust and predictable than a <div> with role= "button". Reach for ARIA only when native elements fall short, and always test thoroughly to ensure you’re enhancing, not complicating, the experience.

Real-Device Testing Is Essential

It’s tempting to rely on automated audits or browser tools alone, but they can’t catch everything. Use screen readers like VoiceOver (iOS) or TalkBack (Android) on physical devices to experience your form the way your users do. Listen closely—do labels get announced properly? Does focus land where it should? Manual testing reveals the gaps no automated tool can catch.

Don’t Forget About Error Messaging

Accessible forms don’t just help users fill in the blanks—they help users recover from mistakes. Validation errors should be announced clearly and immediately after the user interacts with a field. Use ARIA live regions or focus management to draw attention to problems, and provide guidance that’s easy to understand and act on.

Support Multiple Interaction Modes

Not everyone uses a touchscreen the same way. Some rely on voice control, others on external keyboards or assistive switch devices. Design and test with multiple interaction styles in mind. What works great with a finger tap might break down when using voice commands or swiping with a screen reader.

Taken together, these practices do more than check boxes—they create forms that feel intuitive, responsive, and respectful to all users. And as accessibility standards continue to evolve, these foundational steps help future-proof your code while building trust with your audience.

Building Mobile Form Accessibility Into Your Workflow

As developers, we have a real opportunity to do something meaningful. We can move past the minimum and start building digital experiences that work for everyone, not just the majority. It doesn’t require magic—just intention, testing, and a willingness to see the interface through someone else’s eyes.

If you’re serious about creating mobile forms that aren’t just technically compliant but actually usable for every user, it’s time to dig deeper. Start testing, keep learning, and if you want an experienced partner to help guide the process, schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. We’re here to support your journey toward smarter, kinder, and more inclusive design—one tap at a time.
Greg McNeil

May 16, 2025

How-to Guides

Accessibility, accessible forms, forms, How-to, mobile accessibility, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility

Is Manual Accessibility Testing Worth the Time?

Deadlines move fast. Automated accessibility tools promise faster. It’s no surprise many dev teams lean on them—especially when stakeholders are asking, “Are we compliant yet?” Tools like WAVE and Lighthouse give quick answers, clean reports, and a reassuring sense of progress.

But here’s the part too many teams miss: automated testing only tells part of the story. The code might check out, but what about the actual experience? Can someone using a screen reader complete a purchase? Can a keyboard user navigate a modal without getting stuck? These are the kinds of issues that don’t show up in automated scans—but absolutely show up in real life.

If your goal is to build a product that’s not just technically compliant, but genuinely usable and defensible, manual accessibility testing needs to be part of the process. It’s the only way to uncover what automation can’t: nuance, clarity, and usability in the real world.

In this article, we’ll unpack the value of manual testing, where automated tools fall short, and how a smart hybrid approach gives you better results—and better protection.

What Is Manual Accessibility Testing?

Manual accessibility testing is the hands-on process of evaluating a digital product’s usability for people with disabilities—without relying solely on software. This might include:

Navigating with only a keyboard
Using a screen reader like NVDA, JAWS, or VoiceOver
Checking for color contrast by eye
Reviewing focus states and logical tab order
Testing real-world use cases (like filling out a form or completing a checkout process)

The goal is to simulate the experience of actual users with assistive technologies and identify barriers beyond code compliance.

The Appeal (and Limits) of Automated Testing

Automated accessibility tools like Lighthouse and WAVE have transformed developers’ identification of issues. They quickly scan code for missing alt text, incorrect ARIA roles, form labeling issues, and other violations of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).

Automated testing is fast and repeatable. It’s ideal for:

Initial scans during development
Catching basic syntax errors
Setting up CI/CD integration for ongoing testing
Flagging regressions after code updates

But here’s the catch: automation can only detect around 25-35% of accessibility issues. The rest requires human judgment.

What Automated Tools Can’t Catch

Despite their efficiency, automated tools lack the context and empathy of human testing. Here’s what they consistently miss:

Keyboard Trap Detection: Tools may confirm that an element is focusable, but they won’t always detect when users get stuck in modal dialogs or custom components without a proper way to escape.
Screen Reader Usability: Only a human can determine if the screen reader output is logical, coherent, and meaningful in context. Just because a screen reader reads something doesn’t mean it makes sense to the user.
Visual Focus Indicators: Automated checkers might verify the presence of a focus style, but they can’t confirm if it’s visible or intuitive in a real-world interface.
Form Instructions and Error Messages: Does the screen reader clearly announce the error? Are instructions available before a user makes a mistake? Automation doesn’t evaluate the usability of the experience.
Color Contrast in Context: A contrast checker might say a color combination passes WCAG, but it doesn’t judge readability in real UI conditions (like against busy background images or gradients).
Meaningful Link Text: Tools can flag vague text like “click here,” but they don’t understand if a link in a sentence conveys context when read out of order.
Cognitive Load and Ease of Use: Only a human can evaluate whether a layout or interaction is intuitive for users with cognitive disabilities or limited dexterity.

In short, automation checks the code; manual accessibility testing checks the experience.

Why a Hybrid Approach Works Best

The smartest accessibility strategies combine the speed of automation with the nuance of manual testing. Here’s how they complement each other:

Task	Best Method	Why
Catch missing alt attributes	Automated	Fast and reliable for simple HTML validation
Ensure meaningful alt descriptions	Manual	Context is required for accuracy
Validate keyboard navigation	Manual	Humans can detect trap states, confusing order
Check color contrast ratios	Automated	Useful for quick scanning
Judge visual clarity of focus states	Manual	Only human vision can determine visibility
Spot WCAG syntax violations	Automated	Efficient, especially with CI/CD tools
Confirm screen reader compatibility	Manual	Required for usability assurance
Test form completion and feedback	Manual	Critical for real-world workflows

This hybrid approach is not only more accurate—it’s also more defensible in legal contexts. Suppose you’re remediating a site for ADA compliance or preparing for WCAG conformance claims. In that case, you need evidence that your digital experience has been tested by real users or testers simulating those users.

Real-World Example: Checkout Accessibility

Let’s say you’re working on an e-commerce site. An automated test might scan your cart and checkout pages and report:

100% form elements are labeled
Contrast ratios are within limits
No ARIA roles are missing

Looks good.

But a manual tester might uncover:

The shipping address form doesn’t announce errors with a screen reader
The “Apply Coupon” button can’t be reached with the keyboard alone
The payment section’s field focus jumps around unexpectedly
The screen reader reads the price table in a confusing order

These are real barriers that impact sales—and wouldn’t be flagged by automation.

Manual Accessibility Testing Doesn’t Have to Be Time-Consuming

Yes, manual testing takes time. But it doesn’t have to grind your project to a halt.

Here’s how teams can streamline the process:

Integrate manual accessibility testing in sprints. Assign accessibility checks to QA or dev team members alongside other functional testing.
Use assistive tech simulators early. Even five minutes with VoiceOver or NVDA on a new feature can reveal major issues.
Focus on high-impact areas. Prioritize navigation, forms, modals, and anything tied to conversions or essential tasks.
Document patterns. Once you’ve tested common components (like dropdowns, date pickers, etc.), reuse them instead of rebuilding.

And most importantly—train your team. A developer with basic screen reader skills and a solid understanding of WCAG can identify more issues in five minutes than a tool might catch in five hours.

The Long-Term Payoff

Manual accessibility testing isn’t just about checking a compliance box—it’s about protecting your users, your brand, and your bottom line.

Benefits of a hybrid testing strategy include:

Fewer false positives and rework
Better user experience for everyone
Reduced legal risk and stronger compliance
Improved SEO and discoverability
Greater confidence in product quality

When teams understand what to test, how to test it, and why it matters, accessibility becomes a natural part of the development workflow—not an afterthought.

Bridging the Gap Between Code and Experience

So—is manual accessibility testing worth it?

Without question. Automated tools are great for speed, consistency, and catching the basics, but they can’t see the experience through a user’s eyes. Manual accessibility testing brings in that essential layer of human judgment, helping your team uncover issues that really affect usability—especially for people navigating with assistive technologies.

When you pair automation with real-world testing, you’re not just building a site that passes checks—you’re creating something that works better for everyone. It’s a smarter, more resilient way to approach accessibility, especially as legal expectations grow and user expectations rise even faster.

Curious what that could look like for your team? Schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. We’ll walk you through our Phase 2 real-world remediation services—designed to help you go beyond code checks and build accessibility that holds up in practice, not just on paper.

Greg McNeil

May 15, 2025

Testing & Remediation

Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, Accessibility testing, manual audit, Manual Testing, Web Accessibility, Web Accessibility Remediation

Is WCAG Certification Possible?
Many businesses are on the hunt for something called “WCAG certification”—a stamp of approval to show their site is accessible. But is that even a real thing?

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are the widely accepted standard for creating accessible digital content. These guidelines help ensure websites, apps, and digital tools work for everyone—including people with disabilities. But here’s the catch: there’s no such thing as official WCAG certification. That doesn’t mean you’re out of luck, though.

In this article, we’ll unpack what WCAG really is, why it matters, and what practical steps you can take to prove your accessibility commitment—without chasing a non-existent certificate.

What Is WCAG — and Why It Matters

WCAG is a set of accessibility guidelines created by a group called the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). It’s been updated over the years—versions 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 are already in use, and a new draft version (WCAG 3.0) is in the works.

The guidelines are built on four main principles:
- Perceivable: Can people see, hear, or otherwise access your content?
- Operable: Can users interact with it, like using a keyboard or voice commands?
- Understandable: Is your site’s content and layout easy to follow?
- Robust: Will your site work across different devices, browsers, and assistive tech?
These principles help you build a better experience for everyone. And with around 1 in 4 Americans living with a disability, accessibility isn’t a niche issue—it’s a core part of serving your audience.

Can You Get WCAG Certified? (No — and Here’s Why)

Let’s make it simple: WCAG certification does not exist in any official form. The W3C—the organization behind WCAG—doesn’t issue certificates to websites or developers. So if someone tells you they can give you a WCAG certificate, that’s a red flag.

Here’s what does exist:
- WCAG Conformance: This means your website meets specific WCAG success criteria.
- Audit Reports: Accessibility experts can review your site and document its strengths and weaknesses.
- Professional Credentials: Individuals can take training and exams to show they understand accessibility standards.
What you can’t get is an “official” WCAG certification from any governing body. The W3C has actually decided not to create a certification program at all, stating that a formal seal could do more harm than good. So any so-called “WCAG certificate” should be treated carefully—think of it more as “we followed WCAG and have evidence” rather than a license or badge.

Why the Idea of Certification Still Matters

Even though WCAG certification isn’t real, the need to show good faith—especially during legal challenges—is very real.

If your site faces an ADA accessibility complaint, a detailed audit report or a public accessibility statement can help. It won’t guarantee immunity, but it may:
- Shorten legal negotiations
- Lower settlement demands
- Show that you’re actively working on improvements
Most lawsuits under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) focus on fixing the problem (not financial damages at the federal level), but state laws like California’s Unruh Act can make things much more expensive. In some cases, businesses may face penalties of $4,000 per violation—per user session.

Many businesses choose to settle accessibility lawsuits rather than fight in court, with settlements typically ranging from $5,000 to $20,000, and sometimes far more. Proactively documenting your WCAG conformance can reduce those risks and costs.

What You Can Get Instead: Real Accessibility Certifications

While your website can’t be WCAG certified, you or your team can earn credentials that demonstrate knowledge of WCAG and broader accessibility concepts. These are well-respected in the field:
- CPACC – Certified Professional in Accessibility Core Competencies
  Great for content creators, marketers, and generalists. Covers topics like disability types, legal basics, and WCAG principles.
- WAS – Web Accessibility Specialist
  Tailored for developers and UX designers. Dives deep into the technical side: semantic HTML, ARIA, testing practices.
- CPWA – Certified Professional in Web Accessibility
  Combines both CPACC and WAS certifications. Ideal for accessibility leads or those overseeing compliance efforts.
These certifications don’t claim to be WCAG certification, but they do show your commitment to accessibility expertise.

Real Accessibility Is About Practical Action

Certifications help—but they’re not a shortcut. To build and maintain an accessible site, focus on practical, ongoing steps that create real impact.

Run Regular Accessibility Audits

You can use tools like WAVE or Lighthouse, but manual testing is essential too. Look for issues like missing labels, broken keyboard navigation, or poor heading structure. Save your reports as documentation in case questions arise later.

Fix High-Impact Issues First

Some problems—like missing alt text or contrast issues—pose bigger risks than others. Prioritize known trouble spots.

Bake Accessibility Into Development

Make accessibility part of your everyday workflow, not something you tackle at the end. Small habits make a big difference.

Publish a Public Statement

Adding an accessibility statement to your website builds trust and shows you’re being transparent and proactive.

Train Your Content Team

Every upload matters. A well-meaning update can unintentionally introduce accessibility problems—so make sure everyone’s equipped to do their part.

Should You Be Chasing WCAG Certification?

Not exactly. The smarter question is: how do you prove that your site meets WCAG standards?

Here’s how to show your work:
- Encourage team members to earn real accessibility credentials like CPACC or WAS.
- Hire an expert to audit your site and issue a detailed report.
- Post an accessibility statement on your site that outlines your efforts and future plans.
- Monitor your site and run regular checks to ensure improvements are sustained.
And remember: legal risk is growing. Thousands of lawsuits were filed in the past year alone over inaccessible websites. Many target websites that lack basic WCAG conformance.

Accessibility Partners Can Make the Difference

Trying to juggle deadlines, legacy code, and legal exposure? Outside help can give you the lift you need. Experienced accessibility partners don’t just run audits—they help you build a sustainable, legally defensible program.

What expert partners can offer:
- Full audits, including real-user testing
- Help fixing accessibility issues
- Ongoing monitoring to catch new problems
- Role-specific training for devs, designers, and content teams
And a key difference? The right partner will never promise fake WCAG certification. They’ll help you build real results.

You Don’t Need a WCAG Certificate—You Need a Plan

The idea of WCAG certification sounds comforting—but it’s not real. What is real? Earning your users’ trust by making your site work for everyone.

When you show that you’ve taken the right steps—training, audits, public transparency—you don’t need a certificate. You’ve already proven your commitment.

Ready to show your commitment to accessibility the right way?
Schedule an ADA accessibility briefing with 216digital and see how we help teams maintain long-term WCAG conformance and build more inclusive digital experiences.
Greg McNeil

May 14, 2025

Web Accessibility Training

Accessibility, WCAG, WCAG Certification, WCAG Compliance, Web Accessibility, web developers, web development
Don’t Be Fooled by False Positives in Accessibility
Imagine you’re scanning through an accessibility report when it flags a purely decorative image for missing alt text. You pause and double-check the code—aria-hidden= "true" is clearly set—yet the tool insists it’s an issue. In moments like these, you’re dealing with false positives.

When left unchecked, false positives can waste hours of development time, drain your budget, and leave real accessibility problems hidden beneath noise. For developers who regularly rely on automated accessibility testing, learning to recognize and reduce these inaccuracies is as essential as fixing actual accessibility barriers.

What a False Positive Really Is

Simply put, false positives occur when a testing tool incorrectly marks compliant content as inaccessible, even though it aligns perfectly with standards like WCAG. These mistaken alerts often create confusion and lead teams to fix things that aren’t broken—sometimes at the expense of overlooking real issues.

So, why do they happen? Usually, false positives stem from three common causes:
- Limited context: Automated tools understand code but not intent. Elements involving dynamic JavaScript or custom user settings can confuse them, triggering inaccurate alerts. For example, a modal loaded via JavaScript might be marked as inaccessible until it’s fully rendered, even if it meets all WCAG requirements when interactive.
- Overly cautious rules: Some tools are intentionally strict, flagging anything remotely questionable to avoid missing genuine issues. While well-intentioned, this can lead to excessive alerts. Developers end up treating these tools like overprotective smoke alarms—loud, constant, and sometimes hard to trust.
- Varied coding practices: Custom components or unconventional markup patterns, common in modern front-end workflows, often mislead algorithms expecting textbook HTML. Accessibility implemented through ARIA roles or JavaScript event handlers may trip up tools that expect static HTML structures.
Most developers have encountered these scenarios in practice: decorative icons labeled as “critical issues,” contrast alerts ignoring user-selected dark modes, or dynamic form elements incorrectly flagged for missing labels. Each instance represents the broader problem—tools missing the bigger picture.

The Hidden Costs of False Positives

When false positives become part of your day-to-day workflow, the cost isn’t just inconvenience—it’s real impact on time, trust, and outcomes.

Time and Budget Drain

Chasing down false positives can quickly become a costly distraction. Imagine your team spends hours rewriting alt text for images that never needed it. Those same resources could have resolved genuine issues or shipped new features, improving your product instead of spinning its wheels. For larger teams or enterprise projects, these hours quickly compound into days—adding up to measurable delays in delivery and inflated budgets.

This resource drain can be particularly painful during audits or compliance deadlines when teams are working under pressure. Every misfire takes attention away from what truly matters: building inclusive digital experiences for real users.

Erosion of Trust in Tools

Repeated inaccurate alerts erode confidence in accessibility tools. Developers may grow skeptical, dismissing genuine issues as “probably another false positive.” This skepticism can cause real accessibility problems to slip through unnoticed, undermining the very purpose of using these tools.

Once the trust is gone, so is the motivation to use these tools proactively. Instead of integrating accessibility checks early and often, teams may push them off to the final stages—or abandon them altogether. That’s a slippery slope that compromises both compliance and user experience.

Legal and Reputational Risks

Perhaps most serious of all, excessive false positives can mask true accessibility problems. If your team assumes a website is compliant based on misleading tool reports, users could face unexpected barriers. That scenario leaves your organization vulnerable to lawsuits, fines, and damage to brand reputation.

It’s a dangerous combination: a dashboard showing 100% compliance while screen reader users struggle to navigate key interactions. In the worst-case scenario, this could lead to legal action under ADA, Section 508, or similar laws depending on your location or industry.

Practical Steps to Minimize False Positives

It’s not about choosing between automation and accuracy—it’s about striking a balance. Here are a few strategies that can help:

Choose Tools Carefully

Accuracy is crucial. Opt for tools known to minimize false positives—look at reviews, user communities, and real-world feedback. Tools that offer detailed explanations for each issue help developers evaluate the context instead of blindly applying changes. Bonus points for tools that integrate smoothly into your CI/CD pipeline or Git workflows, allowing developers to spot and triage issues earlier in the process.

Combine Automated Testing with Manual Checks

Automation is valuable, but humans bring the necessary context. Regular manual reviews, particularly with real assistive technologies like screen readers or keyboard-only navigation, confirm whether flagged issues are real or simply more false positives. This human element provides critical insights into actual user experiences that no machine can replicate on its own.

Pairing automated scans with periodic expert reviews ensures you don’t end up trusting the scanner more than the people you’re building for.

Educate and Empower Your Team

Providing training ensures everyone knows what a genuine accessibility issue looks like. Regular team briefings, quick reference guides, or lunch-and-learn sessions can equip developers and QA specialists to confidently distinguish true issues from false positives during daily workflows.

It also helps to document commonly misflagged elements in your internal dev wiki or design system docs. That way, developers don’t waste time rediscovering the same conclusions again and again.

Shift Accessibility Testing Left

Accessibility testing should be a routine practice, integrated into every development phase—right alongside linting, unit testing, and code reviews. Early checks catch issues and limit the spread of false positives throughout your codebase.

This shift-left approach reduces last-minute panic before launches and promotes a culture where accessibility is part of the conversation from the start. Teams that embed these habits often find they’re able to respond to flagged issues faster and with greater confidence.

Engage Accessibility Specialists

Sometimes, complex implementations or large-scale projects need specialized insight. Accessibility experts can fine-tune automated testing parameters, spot challenging edge cases, and provide tailored recommendations. Their guidance helps reduce false positives and sets your project on a sustainable path forward.

Even a short-term partnership or audit can clarify which alerts deserve attention and which are tool-generated noise. Think of it like calling in an electrician to check wiring behind the walls—some things are better seen with trained eyes.

A True Positive Path Forward

False positives in accessibility testing aren’t just minor annoyances—they cost valuable resources, erode trust, and potentially expose your site to compliance risks. Left unchecked, they can derail good intentions and cause more confusion than clarity. But with the right balance of tools, process, and people, they don’t have to.

Start by picking better tools, pairing them with manual validation, and investing in your team’s knowledge. Make accessibility part of your workflow—not just a checkbox at the end. And when needed, bring in expert support to cut through the noise.

Want to take your accessibility efforts to the next level? Schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. Our team will help you build a sustainable, practical strategy for achieving real-world accessibility and staying ahead of compliance requirements.
Greg McNeil

May 13, 2025

Testing & Remediation

Accessibility, Accessibility Remediation, false positives, Web Accessibility Remediation, web developers, web development, Website Accessibility
Celebrate GAAD: 6 Ways to Support Inclusion
On Thursday, May 15, 2025, workplaces, campuses, and whole communities will hit “pause” to celebrate Global Accessibility Awareness Day (GAAD)—a grassroots holiday that shines a bright spotlight on digital inclusion.

GAAD sprang from a single, compelling truth: when more people think about accessibility, more people build with accessibility in mind. The numbers speak for themselves—over one billion people around the globe live with a disability, and all of them interact with the web. Boosting access lifts the experience for everyone, from keyboard-only power users to friends scrolling on cracked phone screens. That’s why GAAD isn’t just a tech-industry affair; it’s a call-out that accessibility fuels brand trust, search performance, and legal peace of mind across every sector.

If building an inclusive business matters to you, GAAD is your moment to turn good intentions into forward-motion.

How GAAD Began: A Blog Post That Sparked a Global Movement

Flash back to 2011. Los Angeles developer Joe Devon dashed off a late-night blog post urging his peers to make accessibility “mainstream.” Toronto-based accessibility champion Jennison Asuncion retweeted it, and the duo launched the first GAAD in 2012.

Their concept was delightfully simple: one day each May devoted to thinking and talking about accessibility. No required format, no corporate sponsor—just open-source energy. It stuck. Fourteen years later, GAAD events stretch across every continent, from campus demos to enterprise-scale product sprints. The big takeaway? Progress catches fire the moment developers and designers decide today’s the day to try something new.

Why GAAD Still Matters in 2025

A decade of lawsuits, legislation, and public advocacy has pushed web accessibility onto mainstream project plans. Plenty of U.S. businesses now bake WCAG success criteria into design systems. Yet snag points remain—untagged PDF order forms, checkout flows that lose focus, videos whose auto-captions garble half the words.

GAAD serves as a structured pause to ask three energizing questions:
1. What has improved? Celebrate resolved tickets, fresh color palettes, and alt-text workflows that finally stick.
2. Where do gaps remain? Surface those pesky “parking-lot” issues that never seem to reach sprint planning.
3. How can we raise the bar? Turn wish-list ideas into measurable road-map line items.
Skip this reflection and accessibility efforts stall. Embrace it and teams rediscover energy, secure budget, and align with website-legal-compliance goals.

What’s In It for Business: Real-World Upside
- Highlight Your Commitment: Show your accessibility timeline—audit dates, remediation milestones, and future targets—to build trust with customers, regulators, and stakeholders.
- Strengthen Your Brand: Values-driven shoppers vote with their wallets. Visibility on GAAD proves inclusion is in your brand DNA, not a post-litigation scramble. Expect positive press, boosted employee pride, and a leg up in crowded markets.
- Engage Your Community: Accessibility stories humanize metrics. A quick screen-reader demo or a customer testimonial about smoother checkout turns policy into empathy—and empathy drives adoption far beyond the dev team.
Six Meaningful Ways to Celebrate GAAD 2025

Tip: Pick one or two ideas this year—depth beats volume. Next May, build on what worked.

Share Your Story

Craft a LinkedIn post, blog article, or internal memo chronicling your journey—from first spark (maybe an ADA letter, maybe a passionate employee) to key lessons and next goals. Authentic reflection invites peers to chime in with candid feedback.

Post on Social Media

Bite-sized content travels farther than white papers. Try a 60-second clip of your new color-contrast fix, a carousel of screen-reader shortcuts, or a punchy stat (“Only 3.1 % of home pages meet basic WCAG color contrast.”) with #GAAD and #AccessibilityMatters. Real, raw, and shareable wins every time.

Host an Internal Accessibility Chat

Swap formal workshops for a relaxed brown-bag session. Demo a color-blindness simulator, read sample alt text aloud, or show leadership how one missing label blocks checkout in two keystrokes. Thirty minutes can uncover easy fixes hiding in plain sight.

Educate Your Team

Use GAAD as a micro-learning catalyst. Share a five-minute video on ARIA landmarks, drop a Slack thread with a contrast-ratio calculator, or challenge designers to run a screen-reader audit on your top landing page. Small feats build big confidence.

Start an Accessibility Goals List

Turn “we should” into “we will.” Pick three goals to nail before GAAD 2026—mandatory alt-text fields in your CMS, automated axe-linter checks in pull requests, or a third-party manual audit every year. Publish the list where product owners can’t miss it.

Update Your Accessibility Statement

Keep your public pledge current. Swap vague promises for concrete dates and standards (“As of April 2025, we meet WCAG 2.2 AA on all primary templates”), add a feedback channel straight to your accessibility lead, and spotlight recent wins like reduced-motion options and crisper captions.

Looking Ahead: Building Daily Culture

GAAD is the spark, not the whole fire. Long-term inclusion thrives in daily processes, not one-day celebrations:
- Design sprints: Invite a user with assistive tech into prototype tests.
- Code reviews: Add a check for semantic HTML and keyboard flow.
- Content workflows: Make alt-text and caption columns non-optional.
- Customer support: Train agents to log and escalate accessibility barriers reported by users.
Celebrate your internal champions—developers who relish accessibility puzzles, marketers who write crystal-clear link text. Recognition programs, dedicated Slack channels, or monthly “a11y show-and-tell” sessions keep the momentum humming even when deadlines loom.

Your Invitation to Take the Next Step

GAAD 2025 marks progress, not the finish line. Whether you’re fresh off your first audit or refining mature design systems, there’s always another barrier to remove, another user to welcome. Use the day to celebrate wins, spotlight gaps, and commit to tangible goals.

Need a roadmap? 216digital offers concise ADA-compliance briefings that turn audits into actionable plans, marrying web-accessibility best practices with website-legal-compliance strategies. Schedule a session and walk away with clear next steps, realistic timelines, and renewed confidence that your site greets every visitor with open arms.

Let’s turn one Thursday into twelve months of better digital experiences—because inclusion, like code, gets better with every iterate-and-improve cycle.

Happy GAAD—and happy building!
Greg McNeil

May 12, 2025

Web Accessibility Remediation

Accessibility, ADA Website Compliance, GAAD, Global Accessibility Awareness Day, Web Accessibility, Website Accessibility
aria-label vs aria-labelledby: When and How to Use Each
As developers, we know every interactive element—buttons, dialogs, inputs—needs an accessible name. Good semantic HTML handles this automatically. But let’s face it, our apps get complicated. Sometimes, buttons only show icons, dialogs pull their titles from external components, or complex widgets break the neat semantic model. That’s where ARIA attributes come in. Specifically, aria-label and aria-labelledby help us provide clear,

screen-reader-friendly names. But they aren’t interchangeable. Knowing when to use each can save you debugging headaches down the line.

The Common Ground

First off, let’s review their similarities. Both aria-label and aria-labelledby override native labels provided by HTML. Both directly influence what assistive technologies like screen readers announce. Ideally, though, these ARIA attributes should be your fallback, not the go-to solution—semantic HTML labels are always best.

Quick side note: If you’re ever curious about the details, check out the Accessible Name Computation Algorithm.

Using aria-label: Direct and Hidden

aria-label lets you set an accessible name directly with a string—no extra DOM needed. Here’s a simple example you’ve probably seen before:
```
<button aria-label="Search">
  <svg aria-hidden="true" focusable="false">...</svg>
</button>
```
Perfect for icon buttons or elements that don’t have visible labels. But there’s a catch:
- It’s invisible to sighted users. If your visual UI doesn’t clearly indicate the button’s purpose, this can confuse people.
- It’s static and won’t automatically update with dynamic content changes.
- Localization is manual—you need to integrate these labels into your internationalization setup.
Use aria-label when simplicity outweighs these drawbacks—like icon-only buttons that stay consistent across languages.

aria-labelledby: Harness Visible Content

aria-labelledby points directly to visible content already on the page to build the accessible name. This is super helpful for complex widgets or dialogs:
```
<div role="dialog" aria-labelledby="dialog-title">
  <h2 id="dialog-title">Settings</h2>
  
</div>
```
This is great because:
- Updates to referenced elements automatically update the accessible name—handy for localization or dynamic UI changes.
- You can reference multiple IDs to build richer, descriptive names.
The downside? It requires stable IDs. Reference a missing ID, and your screen reader users will hear nothing—a silent fail you won’t catch easily without testing.

Picking the Right Attribute

Choosing between these two attributes boils down to visibility and localization:
- Visible text already on screen? Use aria-labelledby.
- Icon-only or hidden label? Use aria-label.
- Multiple languages or dynamic content? Lean heavily towards aria-labelledby.
Following these simple guidelines can help keep your UI accessible and your codebase clean.

Common Mistakes (And How to Dodge Them)

Let’s get real: we’ve all made these mistakes:
1. Using both attributes at once: Screen readers only honor aria-labelledby. The leftover aria-label just confuses whoever touches your code next.
2. Referencing IDs that don’t exist: Silent errors are the worst. Double-check your references with automated tools like axe-core.
3. Static English aria-labels on multilingual sites: Always leverage your translation pipeline or use aria-labelledby with translated DOM elements.
Quick example: Imagine a delete button labeled with aria-label="Delete" in English. When your app gets translated into Spanish, this button label stays stuck in English. Switching to aria-labelledby referencing a translated element solves it instantly.

Performance and Maintenance Tips

In frameworks like React or Vue, manage your DOM carefully. Always ensure referenced elements exist in the DOM before referencing components mount. Add automated accessibility checks (like Lighthouse) into your CI/CD setup. They’ll quickly catch misconfigured labels and help you maintain consistent accessibility.

Advanced Label Composition

Need more detail? Stack IDs with aria-labelledby:
```
<span id="action">Confirm</span>
<span id="item">your subscription</span>
<button aria-labelledby="action item">...</button>
```
Now the screen reader clearly announces, “Confirm your subscription.”

Dynamic content? Even simpler:
```
const statusLabel = document.getElementById("status");
statusLabel.textContent = isExpired ? "Expired" : "Active";
// aria-labelledby references statusLabel automatically
```
This dynamic updating is invaluable for reactive or state-driven UI.

Testing Your Accessible Names

Don’t skip manual checks. Fire up VoiceOver, NVDA, or even JAWS and tab through your components the way real users do. Navigate end‑to‑end, listen for odd announcements, and confirm the focus order feels right. Then pair those spot checks with automated tools in CI so labeling issues get fixed long before code ships.

Wrapping Up: Making Strategic Choices

Understanding when to use aria-label versus aria-labelledby might seem minor, but it significantly impacts users’ experience. Choose aria-label for simplicity and directness, especially on icon-driven interfaces. Go with aria-labelledby when leveraging visible, dynamic, or localized content.

Remember, accessibility is about making your interfaces clear for everyone, not just users relying on assistive tech. The strategic use of these attributes ensures your app feels polished and intuitive.

Need a quick gut‑check? Schedule an ADA briefing with 216digital. We’ll walk through your codebase together and make sure every label—and the rest of your accessibility stack—hits the mark.
Greg McNeil

May 9, 2025

How-to Guides

Accessibility, ARIA, aria-label, Web Accessibility, web developers, web development

Accessible Accordion vs Disclosure: Dev Best Practices

Disclosures and accordions show up all over the place—FAQs, menus, settings panels—you name it. They seem simple enough, right? But making sure they actually work for everyone takes more than just toggling some content and calling it a day.

If you’ve ever wondered when to use <details> versus building an accordion with buttons and ARIA, or how to keep screen reader users from getting lost in a sea of hidden panels, you’re not alone. This guide breaks it all down—what to use, when to use it, and how to build a truly accessible accordion without overcomplicating the code.

What Are Disclosure and Accordion Widgets?

Disclosure Widgets: Simple, Native, and Often Overlooked

Disclosures—also known as show/hide widgets—are ideal for toggling a single section of content. Think expandable FAQs or inline help that doesn’t clutter the UI by default.

Here’s a basic example using semantic HTML:

<details>
  <summary>Need more info?</summary>
  <p>Here are more details you might find useful.</p>
</details>

This pattern is fully native and built into the browser, which means it comes with keyboard support and screen reader compatibility right out of the box. You also get the open attribute, which allows you to control whether the content is expanded by default.

The main advantage here is simplicity—no JavaScript needed, and fewer chances to introduce accessibility issues.

Accordion Widgets: More Complex, More Control

An accessible accordion expands on the idea of disclosure by managing multiple content panels. In most implementations, only one section is open at a time, helping users stay focused and reducing cognitive overload.

You can build an accordion using multiple <details> elements, but if you want to control behavior more precisely—like closing other panels when one opens—you’ll need JavaScript.

Here’s what a minimal HTML-only version might look like:

<details name="accordion">
  <summary>Step 1</summary>
  <p>Instructions for step one.</p>
</details>

But to meet WCAG standards for a true accessible accordion, you’ll need to manage keyboard navigation, state indicators, and focus behavior—topics we’ll cover next.

Accessibility Considerations Developers Must Prioritize

Keyboard Navigation That Works for Everyone

An accessible accordion must support meaningful keyboard interactions. Here’s what users expect:

Tab and Shift + Tab to move between interactive elements.
Enter or Space to toggle a section open or closed.
Arrow Up/Down or Home/End to move between accordion headers in more advanced versions.

Missing any of these can make your component unusable for keyboard users. The WAI-ARIA Authoring Practices offer detailed guidance on accordion interaction patterns—worth bookmarking for reference.

Use Semantic Elements—Always

If there’s one golden rule, it’s this: never sacrifice semantics for styling.

That means:

Use <button> for interactive triggers—not <div>, <span>, or anchor tags without href.
If you’re toggling visibility, it’s a button, not a link.
Ensure that elements behave as users (and assistive technologies) expect.

Using semantic elements is one of the most effective ways to ensure your accessible accordion behaves predictably across screen readers and input types.

Add ARIA Where Needed, Not Everywhere

ARIA should enhance native HTML—not replace it. But when you’re building a custom accordion in JavaScript, ARIA becomes essential for communicating component state.

Here’s a basic implementation:

<button aria-expanded="false" aria-controls="info">More Info</button>
<div id="info" hidden>
  <p>Here’s the additional info.</p>
</div>

const btn = document.querySelector('button');
const content = document.getElementById('info');
btn.addEventListener('click', () => {
  const expanded = btn.getAttribute('aria-expanded') === 'true';
  btn.setAttribute('aria-expanded', String(!expanded));
  content.hidden = expanded;
});

This ensures screen readers can track whether content is visible or hidden, creating a seamless experience for all users.

Common Accessibility Mistakes (and How to Fix Them)

Even seasoned devs slip up. Here are a few common issues that can break accessibility—and how to address them:

Mistake	Problem	Solution
Non-focusable triggers	`<div>`s with `onclick` don’t work for keyboard users	Use `<button>` or add `tabindex="0"`
Links used instead of buttons	`<a>` without `href` doesn’t convey intent	Replace with semantic `<button>`
Missing state feedback	Screen readers can’t detect if content is expanded	Dynamically update aria-expanded
Focusable elements in hidden content	Users tab into content they can’t see	Use hidden or display: none correctly

Most of these issues stem from skipping semantic HTML or relying too heavily on JavaScript without proper state management. An accessible accordion avoids these pitfalls by focusing on clarity, intent, and interaction feedback.

Best Practices for Developers

Building an accessible accordion that holds up in the real world means going beyond code snippets. Here’s what to keep in mind:

Start with Progressive Enhancement

Whenever possible, begin with HTML <details> and <summary>. They’re accessible by default and supported in all major browsers. Use JavaScript only when additional behavior—like limiting panels to one open at a time—is truly needed.

Prioritize Focus Visibility

An accordion is only as accessible as its focus states. Make sure every interactive element has a visible focus indicator, and don’t override :focus-visible in your CSS. This isn’t just a WCAG 2.2 requirement—it’s also just good UX.

Avoid Overengineering with ARIA

Don’t reach for ARIA unless you need to. Native HTML tends to be more robust across assistive technologies, and using ARIA incorrectly can make things worse. When in doubt, simplify.

Test Like a User

If you’re not testing with a keyboard, you’re flying blind. Add screen reader testing with NVDA, JAWS, or VoiceOver into your QA flow. Run Lighthouse and WAVE scans, but don’t rely on them alone—they won’t catch everything an actual user would encounter.

Real-World Application: From Good to Great

Let’s say you’re rebuilding a legacy FAQ section. It uses JavaScript to toggle open answers, but it’s riddled with <div>s and missing ARIA.

Start by replacing the markup with semantic HTML:

<details>
  <summary>What’s your return policy?</summary>
  <p>You can return items within 30 days.</p>
</details>

Then, enhance with JavaScript if you want only one section open at a time. Layer in ARIA attributes to improve screen reader support. Suddenly, you’ve turned a clunky widget into a polished, accessible accordion that works for everyone.

Wrapping It Up

Disclosures and accordions might seem interchangeable, but the differences matter—especially when accessibility is on the line. Whether you’re working on a quick FAQ or building a fully dynamic interface, an accessible accordion ensures users with different abilities can navigate and interact with your content.

At the end of the day, accessibility isn’t about checking boxes—it’s about building better interfaces for everyone.

Need help auditing your components?

216digital offers in-depth accessibility support. Schedule an ADA compliance consultation to review your current implementation and ensure everything meets WCAG standards—without compromising design or performance.

Greg McNeil

May 8, 2025

How-to Guides

Accessibility, accessible accordion, Disclosure, How-to, HTML, semantic HTML, web developers, web development

ADA Settlements: Risks, Costs, and Legal Outcomes

When a business is hit with an ADA website accessibility lawsuit, the costs can be more than just financial—they can ripple through development timelines, legal budgets, and brand reputation. And with digital accessibility lawsuits rising yearly, more developers, designers, and product teams are being pulled into legal remediation efforts they didn’t see coming.

But here’s the truth: Not every site needs to achieve 100% WCAG conformance overnight to avoid legal trouble. Smart, risk-aware development teams know how to focus on what matters most—protecting users and reducing legal exposure—without getting bogged down in unnecessary technical perfection.

This article breaks down what ADA settlements typically involve, how to assess legal risk in accessibility work, and when to prioritize critical fixes versus deeper WCAG alignment. Whether you’re retrofitting an existing website or launching something new, understanding the difference between technical and practical compliance can help you make more strategic choices.

What Are ADA Settlements and Why Do They Matter?

An ADA settlement is a legal agreement made outside of court after someone files a complaint or lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act, usually regarding a website or app that isn’t accessible to people with disabilities. These agreements typically include:

A financial payment to the plaintiff (often $5,000–$50,000)
A commitment to fix specific accessibility barriers
A timeline for remediation and reporting requirements
A stipulation to train internal teams on accessibility best practices

Most companies settle because litigation is expensive, time-consuming, and unpredictable. Settling often avoids further public exposure or escalating legal fees—but it still requires swift technical action and long-term accountability.

The Real Costs of ADA Settlements

The direct cost of an ADA settlement can vary, but here’s a realistic breakdown for small to midsize organizations:

Settlement payout: $5,000–$30,000 (on average)
Attorney fees (your side): $5,000–$20,000+
Attorney fees (plaintiff’s side, often paid by you): $5,000–$50,000
Remediation costs: $5,000–$50,000 depending on site size and complexity
Training and monitoring costs: Ongoing

Beyond dollars, there’s the cost of dev time, stakeholder panic, potential press coverage, and damage to brand reputation. It’s no wonder more companies are starting to take accessibility seriously before a lawsuit lands on their desk.

The Technical vs. Practical Accessibility Approach

Let’s be clear—full WCAG 2.1 AA conformance is a great long-term goal. But when lawsuits or legal demands hit, the more strategic question becomes: What do we fix first to reduce the most risk, fastest?

Technical Approach

The technical approach focuses on achieving full conformance with WCAG criteria, including:

Semantic structure (landmarks, headings, ARIA roles)
Keyboard access for all functionality
Color contrast and visual design
Error prevention and accessible forms
Text alternatives for images, media, and interactive elements

While comprehensive, this approach can be time-consuming and expensive, especially if your site wasn’t built with accessibility in mind.

Practical Approach

The practical approach focuses on real-world usage and risk mitigation, emphasizing:

High-risk issues likely to appear in a lawsuit (keyboard traps, unlabeled buttons, inaccessible forms)
Fixes that enable blind, low-vision, and mobility-impaired users to navigate, read, and transact
Remediating issues cited by popular screen readers (e.g., NVDA, VoiceOver) and automated tools (e.g., Google Lighthouse, WAVE)

This approach doesn’t replace full compliance—it prioritizes it. For many developers under pressure, this is the smarter path in the short term.

How to Identify High-Risk Accessibility Issues

You don’t need to fix every single WCAG failure at once. Start by focusing on the most common issues that trigger ADA lawsuits:

Issue Type	Description
Keyboard Traps	Can’t tab out of a modal or menu
Missing Button Labels	Screen readers announce “button” with no context
Inaccessible Forms	Fields lack labels, or error messages aren’t announced
Poor Color Contrast	Text is unreadable for people with low vision
Broken Skip Links	Users can’t bypass repetitive navigation
Inconsistent Heading Use	Screen readers can’t navigate efficiently
Missing Alt Text	Images lack descriptions for screen reader users

Each of these can significantly affect usability—and is a frequent target in lawsuits.

Real-World ADA Settlement Outcomes

To understand how this plays out in the wild, here are three simplified examples:

1. Small Retailer Settles for $15K + Fixes

A small e-commerce business received a demand letter after their cart and checkout were found to be inaccessible to keyboard users. They settled for $15,000 and committed to a 90-day remediation plan targeting key transactional flows.

2. Nonprofit Faces Multiple Complaints

A regional nonprofit was hit with three nearly identical lawsuits within six months. They paid over $60,000 total in settlements, then hired an accessibility partner to run audits, update templates, and add ongoing monitoring.

3. Enterprise Brand Chooses Full Compliance

After receiving a lawsuit, a national retailer chose to settle and invest in full WCAG 2.1 AA remediation. The effort took over 9 months but allowed them to build a sustainable accessibility program and avoid future litigation.

How to Strengthen Accessibility and Reduce Legal Risk

Navigating ADA compliance doesn’t require perfection—it requires prioritization. While no one expects your team to fix everything overnight, there are key actions you can take right now to reduce your legal exposure and improve user access:

Get Grounded in WCAG

You don’t need to memorize the entire spec, but your team should understand the fundamentals. Focus on guidelines related to navigation, labeling, and readable text—areas most often cited in ADA settlements.

Run an Audit—Then Act

Automated scans won’t catch everything, but they’re a fast way to surface high-risk gaps like missing alt text or poor contrast. Follow with targeted manual testing or bring in a specialist like 216digital to validate findings and prioritize fixes.

Train the Right Teams

Developers aren’t the only ones who touch your site. Marketing, design, and content teams need basic accessibility training so issues aren’t reintroduced after remediation. This step is often required as part of ADA settlements and signals long-term commitment.

Monitor Continuously

Accessibility is not a “set it and forget it” process. With 216digital’s a11y.Radar, teams can catch regressions early and stay ahead of future lawsuits.

Stay Adaptive

Standards evolve. So should your strategy. Track changes to WCAG and be ready to update design systems, templates, and workflows to maintain long-term compliance.

Final Thoughts: Don’t Wait for a Lawsuit

ADA settlements are a growing risk—but they’re also preventable. Developers and site owners don’t have to boil the ocean to protect themselves. By taking a practical, high-impact approach to accessibility and knowing what issues matter most in legal outcomes, you can avoid major pitfalls while creating better digital experiences for everyone.

The key is to start. Run a scan, fix a few common issues, and build from there. If you’re unsure where to begin, partnering with an accessibility expert like 216digital can guide you through smart remediation strategies that work—before a lawsuit forces your hand.

Need help navigating accessibility risks?

Schedule a free 15-minute ADA briefing with 216digital. We’ll review your site and talk strategy and help you take the first step toward compliance and peace of mind.

Greg McNeil

May 7, 2025

Legal Compliance, Uncategorized

Accessibility, ADA Lawsuit, ADA Lawsuits, ADA settlements, Web Accessibility

ADA Website Compliance: Quick Fix or Fully Conform?
If you’re here, you probably already know your site needs to be accessible. You might’ve had an audit or maybe a legal notice made things real. But now comes the hard part: what’s the best way forward? Do you fix what’s broken right now and move on, or go all in and follow the full Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)?

Let’s walk through what ADA website compliance really looks like—and how to choose the right approach for your site, your users, and your business.

What ADA Website Compliance Really Means

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) doesn’t give websites a step-by-step checklist. It just says your site needs to be accessible in a way that offers “meaningful access” to people with disabilities. That’s pretty open-ended—and that’s where WCAG comes in.

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are the technical standards most often used to measure accessibility. Courts and government agencies, like the Department of Justice, often refer to WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the benchmark when they evaluate websites for ADA compliance. That version includes over 50 individual requirements that cover everything from color contrast and keyboard navigation to how your site handles screen readers.

So, when we talk about ADA website compliance, we’re really talking about how closely your site follows WCAG—and whether users with disabilities can actually navigate and use your site without barriers.

Two Paths to Accessibility: Full ADA WebsiteCompliance vs. Practical Fixes

When you’re deciding how to move forward, there are really two main paths: full WCAG conformance or practical remediation. They both aim to make your site better, but they approach the goal very differently.

What Full WCAG Compliance Means

Full WCAG compliance means that your website meets every requirement outlined in the WCAG 2.1 Level AA standards. These guidelines are built around four main principles: your content must be Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust.

So what does that mean in practice?

What Users Should Experience

It means users should be able to:
- See or hear your content, no matter how they access it.
- Navigate your site using just a keyboard, or a screen reader, or other assistive tools.
- Understand your interface—forms, menus, buttons—without confusion.
- Interact with a website that works consistently across browsers, platforms, and assistive tech.
Getting There: The Work Involved

Getting to full compliance isn’t just about checking a few boxes. It’s a full audit, followed by deep changes to your code, design, and sometimes even content workflows. You’ll need to scan every page, test key user journeys, and update components to work for everyone—not just mouse users or sighted users. That often includes:
- Fixing or rebuilding navigation menus to support keyboard use
- Adding semantic structure (like proper heading levels) to every page
- Making sure pop-ups and modals don’t trap users
- Providing descriptive alt text and meaningful link names
- Ensuring color contrast is high enough for users with low vision
- And much more
It’s a big lift—but it’s also the most reliable way to reduce legal risk, improve usability, and ensure long-term accessibility. If your site serves the public sector, a large audience, or is part of a digital product suite, full compliance may be the smartest move—even if it takes time. ADA website compliance at this level shows a proactive, inclusive mindset.

What Practical Accessibility Remediation Means

Practical accessibility remediation focuses on what’s legally risky and functionally broken. You’re not rebuilding the whole site; you’re fixing the issues that do the most harm.

Practical accessibility remediation focuses on what’s legally risky and functionally broken. That means you start by identifying the most common barriers that actually stop people from using your site.

Popular High-Risk Issues
- Missing alt text: If screen readers can’t describe an image, the user misses the point.
- Keyboard traps: If someone can’t navigate out of a menu or modal with a keyboard, they’re stuck.
- Unlabeled form fields: Without a proper label, assistive technology can’t tell the user what input is expected.
- Low color contrast: Text blends into the background and becomes unreadable for users with vision issues.
- Videos without captions: Deaf users can’t understand the content at all.
You’re still auditing your site, but instead of trying to fix everything, you prioritize the areas that cause the most user frustration or legal exposure. It’s faster. It takes fewer resources. And it still makes a real difference for accessibility and ADA website compliance in the short term.

The Trade-Offs

The tradeoff? Practical fixes don’t cover the full scope of WCAG. Some issues—like redundant link text, improper heading structure, or ARIA roles—might go untouched. That leaves some risk on the table, and it means you’ll still need a plan to address those later.

How to Decide What’s Right for You

You don’t need to be a lawyer or a developer to make a smart call here—you just need to think about your audience, your risk, and your roadmap.

If you’re a government agency, a university, or a large brand, full WCAG compliance may be expected—or even required in contracts. You’ll want a long-term accessibility partner, a roadmap with milestones, and time set aside for remediation work.

If you’re a small business or mid-sized e-commerce site, practical fixes might be the right place to start. You can quickly reduce your legal risk while making meaningful improvements for your users.

That said, practical remediation should always be seen as step one—not the final goal. Accessibility is not a one-and-done task. It’s part of how you build and maintain a trustworthy, inclusive brand.

Steady Progress Beats Perfect Overnight

Full WCAG compliance and practical remediation aren’t at odds. They’re two parts of the same journey. Many teams start with quick fixes to cover high-risk issues, then work toward full compliance over time—integrating accessibility into future design and development cycles.

Here’s the key takeaway: ADA website compliance isn’t about perfection. It’s about progress. Fix what’s hurting users now. Make a plan for what comes next. And build a process that helps you get better with every release.

If you’re unsure where your site stands or how to move forward, talk to a specialist. At 216digital, we help teams like yours take real, measurable steps toward accessibility—whether that’s a quick win or a full transformation. Schedule a briefing today and start building a website that works for everyone.
Greg McNeil

May 6, 2025

Testing & Remediation

Why Accessibility Still Matters for Embedded Content

A Quick History of Frames (and Why They Were Retired)

Where Iframes Fit Today

Best Practices for Accessible Iframes

Give Every Iframe a Descriptive Title

Keep Keyboard Navigation Intuitive

Maintain a Logical Heading Structure

Let the Browser Handle Scrolling

Embrace Responsive Iframes

Hide Decorative or Redundant Iframes

When to Skip Accessible Iframes Altogether

Testing Your Work

Wrapping Up

The Real Challenge of Mobile Accessibility

Common Barriers with Mobile Form Accessibility

Invisible Text Fields

Quick fix:

Keyboard Blocking Form Fields

A simple JavaScript nudge:

Unexpected Focus Shifts

Rules of thumb:

Practical Steps to Improve Mobile Form Accessibility

Proper Labeling Is Crucial

Design with Keyboard Visibility in Mind

Maintain a Logical Navigation Order

Use Semantic HTML First, ARIA Thoughtfully

Real-Device Testing Is Essential

Don’t Forget About Error Messaging

Support Multiple Interaction Modes

Building Mobile Form Accessibility Into Your Workflow

What Is Manual Accessibility Testing?

The Appeal (and Limits) of Automated Testing

What Automated Tools Can’t Catch

Why a Hybrid Approach Works Best

Real-World Example: Checkout Accessibility

Manual Accessibility Testing Doesn’t Have to Be Time-Consuming

The Long-Term Payoff

Bridging the Gap Between Code and Experience

What Is WCAG — and Why It Matters

Can You Get WCAG Certified? (No — and Here’s Why)

Why the Idea of Certification Still Matters

What You Can Get Instead: Real Accessibility Certifications

Real Accessibility Is About Practical Action

Run Regular Accessibility Audits

Fix High-Impact Issues First

Bake Accessibility Into Development

Publish a Public Statement

Train Your Content Team

Should You Be Chasing WCAG Certification?

Accessibility Partners Can Make the Difference

You Don’t Need a WCAG Certificate—You Need a Plan

What a False Positive Really Is

The Hidden Costs of False Positives

Time and Budget Drain

Erosion of Trust in Tools

Legal and Reputational Risks

Practical Steps to Minimize False Positives

Choose Tools Carefully

Combine Automated Testing with Manual Checks

Educate and Empower Your Team

Shift Accessibility Testing Left

Engage Accessibility Specialists

A True Positive Path Forward

How GAAD Began: A Blog Post That Sparked a Global Movement

Why GAAD Still Matters in 2025

What’s In It for Business: Real-World Upside

Six Meaningful Ways to Celebrate GAAD 2025

Share Your Story

Post on Social Media

Host an Internal Accessibility Chat

Educate Your Team

Start an Accessibility Goals List

Update Your Accessibility Statement

Looking Ahead: Building Daily Culture

Your Invitation to Take the Next Step

The Common Ground

Using aria-label: Direct and Hidden

aria-labelledby: Harness Visible Content

Picking the Right Attribute

Common Mistakes (And How to Dodge Them)

`aria-labelledby`: Harness Visible Content