What has been tested, and what has not.

Conformance target

This site targets WCAG 2.2 level AA. That clears the WCAG 2.1 AA floor referenced by EN 301 549 v3.2.1 for the European Accessibility Act, and by the ADA Title II rule in the United States.

Current status: partially conformant, self-assessed. We have not commissioned an external audit, and we are not going to describe an untested site as conformant.

What is implemented

• Skip link, semantic landmarks, one h1 per page and no skipped heading levels — asserted by an automated structure check across every page.
• A visible :focus-visible ring, 2px at 3px offset, never removed.
• No meaning carried by colour alone. Every status chip carries a glyph, the active navigation item carries a marker as well as an underline, and comparison leanings carry a symbol.
• Contrast measured rather than estimated. Signal colours have separate variants for light surfaces because the dark-surface versions do not clear 4.5:1 on paper.
• Touch targets of 44px on interactive controls — the AAA threshold (2.5.5), above the 24×24 AA floor.
• prefers-reduced-motion respected. The Timeline's reveal animation is removed entirely; the scroll-linked progress rail stays, because it responds to your own scrolling rather than moving on its own.
• Keyboard operation throughout, including the Timeline filters, the era axis (arrow keys, Home, End) and the comparison instruments.

What has not been done

Stated plainly, because an accessibility statement that lists only successes is not one.

• Automated checks do not prove conformance. Production QA runs axe-core on representative desktop and mobile views, in addition to structural checks across every generated page. It cannot reproduce screen-reader output or user experience.
• No screen-reader testing. Nothing has been verified against NVDA, JAWS or VoiceOver. ARIA on this site follows the APG patterns, but following a pattern is not the same as testing it.
• No testing with assistive-technology users.
• The Legacy URL Mapper requires JavaScript. It is the analysis, and a server-side fallback would mean uploading your URLs — which is exactly what the tool promises not to do. The method is published in full so it can be implemented independently.

Reporting a barrier

If something on this site blocks you, tell us and we will fix it. Describe the page, what you were trying to do, and the assistive technology and browser you were using if that is relevant.

Report an accessibility barrier

Response time

We aim to acknowledge accessibility reports within five working days.

Enforcement

This is a voluntary accessibility statement for a small independent publication. No formal public-sector enforcement procedure is claimed; unresolved concerns can be directed to the operator.

How this was assessed

Self-assessment against the WCAG 2.2 success criteria during development, automated structural checks across every generated page, and an axe-core browser audit on the homepage, Timeline, URL Mapper, Search and legal pages at representative desktop and mobile sizes. Those checks catch detectable failures, not perception — which is why the untested list above still matters.

---

Last reviewed 22 August 2026. Material changes to this document are recorded in the site changelog and announced in Pulse.