Accessibility Heuristics

Published on October 7, 2008 (↻ August 6, 2023), filed under (RSS feed).

You can bolster your accessibility knowledge by internalizing heuristics and ground rules. Just having updated my German article on accessibility heuristics it looked useful to share these in English as well. These guidelines and rules are based on documentation provided by the W3C and IBM and come without comment; it’s still useful, indispensable even, to consult the source material.

W3C

WCAG 1.0 Quick Tips

The classic “quick tips” stem from the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0:

(It’s great that QA is being called out!)

WCAG 2.0 Quick Tips

With WCAG 2.0 come new and improved tips:

WCAG 3.0 Guidelines [Update (July 6, 2021)]

WCAG 3.0 is in progress and may offer tips similar to prior WCAG versions. Its general structure offers rough orientation:

IBM

IBM once shared their own set of accessibility recommendations and heuristics that is now, along with more detailed information, offered by the ACM:

Toot about this?

About Me

Jens Oliver Meiert, on September 30, 2021.

I’m Jens, and I’m an engineering lead and author. I’ve worked as a technical lead for companies like Google, I’m close to W3C and WHATWG, and I write and review books for O’Reilly and Frontend Dogma. I love trying things, not only in web development, but also in other areas like philosophy. Here on meiert.com I share some of my views and experiences.

If you have a question or suggestion about what I write, please leave a comment (if available) or a message. Thank you!

Comments (Closed)

  1. On October 8, 2008, 6:27 CEST, Joe Clark said:

    Use links that make sense in their context, not out of context.

  2. On October 8, 2008, 8:55 CEST, Jens Oliver Meiert said:

    Valid distinction. I quoted the guidelines.

  3. On October 22, 2008, 11:24 CEST, Richard Morton said:

    As WCAG 2.0 is still at the candidate recommendation stage, I must admit that my knowledge of it is lacking so it is definitely useful to see it summarised here. One thing I have found useful to help me remember the overall concept is POUR (Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, Robust), which I think is a really good way of explaining accessibility in a non-technical way.