Rendered checks where possible
Browser-level evidence can verify contrast and target-size conditions that raw HTML alone cannot.
The engineering case
Evidence coverage matters as much as the number.
HIC evaluates semantic structure, accessible names, logical headings, control purpose, rendered contrast, touch targets, forms and media alternatives where evidence allows. Keyboard interaction and other specialist conditions remain explicitly unverified when automation cannot establish them.
Not applicable is not failure
A page with no form controls should not receive a fabricated form score.
Human testing still matters
Automated evidence is useful, but it is not represented as a complete formal accessibility audit.
Reference definition
A clear definition for humans and machines.
Website Accessibility
Website accessibility is the practice of making digital information and functionality perceivable, operable and understandable across a wide range of abilities, devices and assistive technologies. Automated checks are valuable evidence, but they are not a complete accessibility audit.
Automation can prove some things and only suggest others
Machines can detect many missing names, contrast failures, invalid relationships and structural issues. They cannot reliably prove that every workflow is understandable, that keyboard order is sensible in context or that alternative text communicates the right meaning. HIC therefore records what automation can establish and leaves specialist or interaction-dependent conditions explicitly unverified when necessary.
WCAG 2.2 is the core technical reference
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines provide testable success criteria organised around perceivable, operable, understandable and robust experiences. HIC does not present itself as a replacement for a formal WCAG conformance audit. Instead, it incorporates defensible automated evidence into a broader human-impact assessment and makes its limitations visible.
Not applicable is not a failure
A page with no form controls cannot fail a form-label criterion simply because no form exists. Likewise, evidence unavailable is not the same as evidence of failure. Clear state semantics protect both site owners and users from misleading scores and make the report more useful to engineers.
Accessibility improves system quality
Semantic controls, visible focus, clear labels, sufficient contrast and predictable structure often improve usability beyond disability-specific scenarios. They also tend to produce cleaner machine-readable documents. Accessibility is therefore not an isolated compliance layer; it is part of robust web engineering.
Engineering checklist
What a strong implementation should cover.
- ✓ Semantic landmarks
- ✓ Keyboard-operable controls
- ✓ Visible focus
- ✓ Accessible names
- ✓ Sufficient contrast
- ✓ Appropriate target sizes
- ✓ Form labels and errors
- ✓ Meaningful alternative text
- ✓ Logical heading structure
- ✓ Manual testing for interaction-dependent criteria
Key terminology
Definitions that remove ambiguity.
- WCAG
- Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, the W3C accessibility standard used internationally.
- Accessible name
- The programmatic name assistive technologies use to identify a control or element.
Questions people ask
What this means in practice.
Why can some accessibility criteria be grey?
Grey can mean not assessed, evidence unavailable or not applicable. HIC keeps those states distinct because they imply different things.
Can automated testing prove full keyboard accessibility?
No. Automated focus-related checks can provide evidence, but complete keyboard operability requires interaction testing.
Primary references
Standards and platform guidance behind this knowledge layer.
HIC combines its own assessment methodology with public web standards and current search-engine guidance. External references support the conventional web principles described here; HIC-specific scoring, evidence classes and impact modelling remain HIC methodology.
- Google Search Central — Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content
- Bing Webmaster Guidelines
- Bing Webmaster Tools — AI Performance
- Bing Webmaster Tools — IndexNow
- W3C — Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2
- Schema.org — Organization
References are provided for verification and further reading. Inclusion does not imply endorsement of HIC by the referenced organisations.
Explore the knowledge graph
Related HIC source pages.
Each page focuses on one primary topic so humans, search engines and AI systems can retrieve a clear canonical source instead of inferring the entire platform from a single page.