We Analyzed 10M Pages. Here’s Where Most Fail with ADA and WCAG 2.1 Compliance

Creating accessible websites is a pain. And doing it properly is expensive.

There's many screenreaders and they can get expensive. They also can have quirks of their own. UK government accessibility blog is a good resource on how to create accessible websites and forms[0].

I also tested accessibe.com's frontpage to see how accessible their own site is. For this test I used Google Chrome with Lighthouse[1] accessibility testing set to desktop. Lighthouse reported a score of 84/100 where bigger is better.

Some links don't have text, but an image with an alt text. Some text colors are not WCAG contrast compliant. The viewport maximum-scale is limited to 1, so the user cannot zoom on the website on a mobile device.

I also ran another accessibility checker called axe[2]. It reported 88 issues. Funnily enough, on the blog post they slammed icon fonts such as fontawesome or icomoon, and they themselves use icomoon without a screen readable text. Most of the issues were related to links not having discernible text, elements not having sufficient color contrast, and lack of landmarks on the page content.

[0]: https://accessibility.blog.gov.uk/

[1]: https://developers.google.com/web/tools/lighthouse

[2]: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/axe-web-accessibil...