Inspirations

“An image can be non-informative without being meaningless.” Yes! There is so much discussion around visual description, what should be described and how. As a result, when we can’t find answers to these questions, we tend to mark visuals as decorative. On the other hand, as Nicolas Steenhout mentions, most images add context and mood to a website. Even though blind people cannot see, they know the visual world and can understand what is happening. For this reason, don’t use the term “decorative” as an excuse for “I don’t want to write alt text for this.”

As I understand from Shawn Henry’s article, the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group seems to be fed up with being treated as official lawmakers. And they are right. WCAG provides accessibility standards, while laws and regulations are the official frameworks that enforce WCAG conformance. Therefore, building a bridge between applicability and user needs is not W3C’s responsibility; their main responsibility is to define and document user needs. On the other hand, W3C often ends up acting as a balancing authority to find common ground among all stakeholders. As people with disabilities, we must continue to voice our needs to the W3C and ensure they remain central to the standards.

Honestly, I am bored of articles that just say “do this and don't do that for accessibility.” That’s why I love Diana Khalipina’s Dyslexia Awareness Wheel. She offers practical suggestions that can improve the experience of people with dyslexia, which you can explore by spinning the wheel. It's a very simple form of gamification that could easily be used for corporate awareness-raising activities!

In his "… Will Get You Sued" series of articles, Adrian Roselli explains how accessibility overlays do not work. In this article, he highlights Corpowid’s and Skynet Technologies’ solutions and their WCAG violations. Sometimes, even the companies selling overlays cannot solve their own accessibility issues with overlays. That is why he advises: "Don’t use accessibility overlays. They do not work. If you want to install one to help users, keep reading. If you want to build one because you think it can help users, you’re kidding yourself."

Let’s be honest: almost nobody seems to care about WCAG AAA. Since there is no legal regulation enforcing WCAG AAA compliance, every organization sets its accessibility target strictly at WCAG A or AA. This often renders AAA criteria 'redundant' in real-world applications. The W3C Accessibility Guidelines Working Group co-chair addressed these exact issues regarding WCAG levels, reminding us that assigning levels to criteria requires striking a balance between user needs, technical capability, design impact, and budget. He also highlighted that in WCAG 3.0, these levels will become more flexible and practical which might finally solve this 'redundant criteria' problem.

The Dunning-Kruger effect is overestimating your competence when you lack knowledge, and underestimating it when you have expertise. Linking this cognitive bias to accessibility is a brilliant idea. Craig Abbott outlines a 5-step accessibility journey, from over-relying on automated tools to accepting that accessibility will never be perfect. Also, this article provides a great framework for evaluating accessibility maturity levels.

If you are a disabled person and want to buy a foldable phone, you have to read this article. Sheri Byrne-Haber (disabled) wrote a detailed analysis of the advantages and risks of foldable phones. While their large screen and the possibility of hands-free positioning seem advantageous for partially sighted people and many other disability groups, foldable devices need specific hand gestures and two-handed action most of the time. For people with muscular limitations, these can create risks and challenges. Since this is a new technology, it comes along with new design breakpoints for websites and apps. So, the speed of screen reader responses and magnification accuracy should be tested in detail especially when layout changes.

Anna E. Cook explains very clearly how food allergies are connected to UX. For example, Amazon often shows bestsellers or similar items inside search results. Because of this, when you search for a gluten-free product, gluten-containing items can also appear in the results. If a user searches for a gluten-free item, they naturally trust a trillion-dollar shopping platform to bring the correct results.

Uber is generally a great example of digital accessibility with its mobile app and accessibility features, including a simplified interface. But one of the most unique aspects of Uber is adding inclusivity to its content and services as well. For example, the article mentions Uber’s pilot study on the "Easy Entry Vehicle" designation for cars that do not require a high step when boarding. Additionally, you can notify drivers about mobility aids, such as a cane or walker. This is an example of the importance of adding an inclusivity layer on top of WCAG compliance.

This article presents nothing new, but it is still an inspirational piece because of its simplicity. Sometimes we talk about accessibility as it is rocket science and provide too many details, even to newcomers. Yes, this is an expertise, and yes, there are many details. However, as Michael Harshbarger mentioned, starting accessibility work should not require very much technical knowledge or infrastructure. The action-oriented nature and simplicity of the article are my key sources of inspiration.

In Notes # 22, I covered WCAG-EM, a methodology outlining how to select samples for accessibility testing. This article serves as a step-by-step practical guide on how to effectively apply WCAG-EM in your workflow. Karl Groves tackles controversial questions and challenges standard industry assumptions around sampling as well. Shortly, the main issue is not the page count. Component architecture and root causes should be the main point.

Here is content similar to the article above, a video for audiovisual learners. This time, sampling is discussed in the context of enterprise-level organizations with a large number of websites. Seeing an increasing amount of content on WCAG-EM makes me hopeful, as it may lead to a more systematic approach to accessibility. On the other hand, there is a slight risk: organizations should always be reminded that an audit based on sampling cannot be used to claim full conformance. In other words, WCAG-EM is just a starting point, not the road to the finish line.

This is the most detailed and practical article on color accessibility that I have ever read. Color accessibility is about more than just calculating contrast ratios. People with glaucoma, autistics, or people who suffer from migraines experience colors, hues, and saturation differently than those with standard vision. Even I do not mention color blindness. That is why a correct contrast ratio alone will not solve all of our problems. Extremely high contrast ratios (e.g., pure white on pure black) or bright red can have an adverse impact on different sensory perceptions. Read this article to learn how to create truly accessible color sets.

We all know that Lighthouse or axe scores cannot be used as proof of compliance or usability. The coverage of automated tests is limited, which often results in misleading scores. In this article, AAArdvark’s scoring system feels like a logical alternative because it incorporates manual testing into the score calculation. Furthermore, continuous score updates provide a framework for mainstreaming accessibility into workflows and keeping it on the team's agenda. I really like the mindset of treating a "score as a progress indicator rather than a compliance target.”

I love football, so I love the idea behind this article. Given how highly competitive the Super League in Turkey is, we have to replicate this study here as well. Furthermore, the methodology used seems very logical to me. Normally, these kinds of studies are conducted using only automated tests, but Alvaro Montoro places greater weight on manual testing and introduces a clear scoring framework. He also incorporates automation results, along with the performance and structure of the website. This article is a real inspiration for me to create an accessibility scoring framework.

As an accessibility specialist, I am working closely with the design team in our organization. Sometimes we cannot find a common ground just because of WCAG contrast rules that are different from real human perception. WCAG is not applicable in some cases, as can be seen in the example in the LinkedIn post that I linked above. Therefore, I am looking forward to APCA being implemented in WCAG 3.

A very simple tool to answer “How long will it take to make my product accessible?”. It depends on the number of pages, the average number of issues per page, the number of developers working on accessibility and their estimated effort, and the average time spent on an issue. I just wanted to insert a number less than 1 for the “hours for remediation for an issue” question, but it is not possible yet.

Chris Young clearly exemplifies visible focus and focus order criteria with videos in the article. The number of issues also surprised me, by the way. Why is this happening? 'Only 5% of Frontend jobs mention WCAG, we have an issue.'

Due to the ADA Title II deadline, most state governments and higher education institutions discussed PDFs extensively until this April. This article attributes the high number of inaccessible PDFs to web pages being treated as digital archives. Having too many outdated and unused files is not just an accessibility issue; it is a website governance problem. In fact, accessibility requirements might actually be a great opportunity to clean up websites that have turned into digital junkyards. The strategy is simple: Identify and remove unnecessary documents, and if a document is truly necessary, make it accessible.

“Choosing colors that are compliant on both white and black backgrounds can make it much easier to build components that work consistently in both light and dark themes without sacrificing readability. It can also reduce the number of color variations that need to be designed, tested and maintained.” While there is a very small range of colors that can be used, Diana offers several practical suggestions in the article.

“Conformance answers whether a product met the criteria once. Resilience answers whether it will still meet them after the people, the platform, the regulations, and the tooling have all changed, because all of them will.” That’s why sustainability in accessibility is key, and Sheri Byrne-Haber (disabled) highlights several barriers to resilient accessibility efforts. In the article, she outlines six questions that should be posed to the team during an accessibility workshop.

I have been following the 'Accessibility in the News' newsletter for two years, and it was the main inspiration for me to start the Accessibility Notebook. You can find many great updates and blog articles from the US and around the world. In the 10th-anniversary article, Jack McElaney summarizes his knowledge and shares key insights into the field of accessibility. I especially recommend reading the year-by-year developments and the ten themes.

There is a term called “chemo brain,” which refers to “a cognitive impairment related to chemotherapy that affects memory, focus, and word-finding.” That’s why cancer survivors may experience difficulty in reading text, following instructions, and navigating websites. For this reason, accessibility measures can enhance the experience of cancer survivors as well. Using bullet points instead of big blocks of text, incorporating more visuals and icons, and using larger fonts with high contrast between text and background are some of the recommendations. Accessibility is always beneficial for more people than expected.

There are many automatic testing tools for accessibility. But none of them fully meet my expectations. Either their error explanations are hard to understand, or they report errors that are not actually errors. Because of this, there are very few tools we can recommend to test teams. However, the tools Diana Khalipina collected in her article “show” how assistive technologies experience the system. These are very useful tools both for understanding accessibility and doing basic checks.

As mentioned in AIMAC, AI have limitations when it comes to accessibility. Therefore, understanding their limits and possibilities is important. LLMs can understand WCAG criteria, suggest semantic HTML, spot common accessibility failures, and fix basic accessibility issues. However, suggesting context-dependent solutions, overusing ARIA patterns, implementing user experience best practices, and simulating flows with assistive technologies can be challenging. That’s why AI is not an accessibility expert for now, but it is a valuable accessibility assistant that you can consult.

A very clear explanation of how the experiences of screen reader users and sighted users differ. As Dax Castro mentions, sighted users comprehend a page from "whole-to-part" because they can quickly scan the overall layout and understand where specific information is located. On the other hand, screen reader users navigate a page item by item, understanding its structure from "part-to-whole." This is why headings and landmarks are so critical for accessibility. Also, I loved the menu example at the beginning of the article.

"Page titles, heading structure, image alternative text, descriptive link text, and links built with real <a href> markup all matter to assistive technology users and to search engines." However, the benefits of accessibility on SEO are overrated and can sometimes be misleading. According to AFixt’s study, "83% of all accessibility failures are invisible to SEO. [And], the most frequent and most severe failures mean nothing to Google. [...] The overlap exists because both disciplines inherited a sliver of the same foundation: semantic HTML. [...] Accessibility starts there and then extends into interaction, perception, and comprehension. This is territory no search bot enters." In short, care about accessibility not for SEO, but for user experience, compliance, and simply because it is the right thing to do.

I am an accessibility person, but I don't have a formal UI/UX background. While working on accessibility within our organization, I also participate in UI/UX meetings with our design team, where we discuss design issues that affect accessibility. Therefore, we have to create a balance between design and accessibility to reach an optimal point. This is why I am so curious about UI and UX. This article exemplifies some key points and makes the topic very easy to understand.

As David Bushell mentioned, giving ARIA Authoring Practices (APG) to an LLM and waiting for an accessible result is a very common practice. But this violates the first rule of ARIA, which is: Do not use ARIA! Since the APG is a biased guideline that favors ARIA, it naturally recommends ARIA implementation everywhere, even when an HTML solution is applicable. Consequently, this creates more complicated and confusing products in terms of accessibility. You can read more details from the article.

Since we are talking about ARIA and HTML, let me share a tool with you: “Semantica11y (by Mark Steadman ) is a small, focused rules engine that analyzes your application and highlights places where semantic HTML should be used instead of ARIA-heavy or non-semantic patterns. It’s not Axe-core, its not a WCAG violation checker, it’s simply a tool that helps you write cleaner, sustainable, and more accessible markup from the start.”

A great article on some disturbing facts in the age of AI. Like most people, I also believed that there is a significant overlap between what AI agents need and what screen reader users need to navigate a web page. “However, this overlap is narrower than it appears. Screen reader users require not only plaintext, but also structure: heading hierarchies that allow jumping between sections, landmark regions, descriptive link text, and alt text for images.” In contrast, for AI, plaintext alone is sufficient. Therefore, designing for AI does not inherently mean designing for accessibility. Unfortunately, as an obvious fact, everyone tends to prioritize AI over accessibility. This can be defined as the “reverse curb cut effect”. To read more on this discussion, you can check out the article.

Sheri Byrne-Haber (disabled) has summarized some common failures made in the planning phase of an accessibility program. Under the name of “prioritization,” we sometimes miss critical points that result in partial accessibility of the product. You may have made most of your product accessible, but have you tested error states, the mobile site, or PDFs? In this article, you can read about some frequently overlooked states and flows, and perhaps evaluate your digital accessibility program again.

If you are interested in UX and typography, check out Oliver Schöndorfer's videos and newsletter. In his latest video, he reviewed the 2026 FIFA World Cup font and its usage. His main point is that the problem lies not with the font itself, but with how it is used. For example, a bold and ultra-condensed form should not be used in small text. In the video, you can see more screenshots and funny moments combined with valuable UX lessons.

If you are trying to convince executives to launch an accessibility program, most of the time they will ask how many people are affected by accessibility issues and how many users complain about accessibility. It is difficult to talk about numbers in the field because this is a complex issue related to individuals' habits, risk perception, energy, and some other practical barriers. This article contains a very useful infographic summarizing all these reasons. Perhaps you can use it in your high-level presentations.

In Notes # 10, I wrote an “In Detail” section on Windows High Contrast Mode, but this article is even better than mine. I had included several screenshots and explained the common accessibility issues encountered when High Contrast Mode is turned on. In this article, you can also find code-level explanations and solution suggestions.

A great article explaining what dyslexia is. “In accessibility, we know there is no solution that works for everyone. That’s why we build flexibility. We give users choices. (…) So, instead of forcing a ‘magic dyslexia font’ on people – give them the tools to adjust things themselves. Character spacing, line spacing, text size, font, contrast, zoom. Trust that they know what works for them.”

Likewise in the article, I encountered a colorblind edition of the famous card game UNO. Your aim is to finish the cards in your hand by matching the color or number of the card on the table. In the colorblind edition, there are small symbols in different colors: a circle for blue, a rectangle for red, and so on. From this article, I learned that there is a color alphabet for the colorblind, and it is a very logical system. You can understand the relationship between orange and red very easily because primary colors like red, yellow, and blue have simple specific symbols. The symbols of other colors are generated from this baseline and create more complex keys. The good thing is that you can use the ColorADD mobile app to translate real-world colors into ColorADD symbols.

Lovable has a built-in accessibility tool that runs Axe for automated tests. So, a website that scored 100% accessibility may still have some accessibility issues because of the limited capacity of automated checks. In the article, all the issues detected by manual tests are shown with videos. In general, Axe cannot detect content-dependent issues like missing heading structure or label–visible name mismatches. Also, action-needed detections cannot be run via automation. That’s why focus management issues, unannounced states of components, and status messages are some of the accessibility issues that cannot be detected.

“AI output never leaves the middle. It always lands somewhere between a 2 and a 7. Never a 1. Never an 8.” Which means “it can’t make something accidentally brilliant. It can’t make something so specific and weird that you remember it three years later. It pattern-matches toward the median of acceptable.” That’s why human effort is needed to create truly great work. AI is a facilitator that helps you do your work, and only AI–human cooperation will guide us toward a perfect output.

“Half of U.S. states now require online age verification,” and the face verification trend is becoming more widespread in more than 30 countries around the world. However, verification systems do not accurately recognize the faces of persons with disabilities. People with down syndrome, dwarfism, or adults whose appearance was altered by childhood cancer treatment, growth hormone therapy, facial reconstruction, or endocrine conditions that delayed development may be read as minors. Also, wheelchair users and blind people can experience challenges reaching or centering the webcam to use the system. Sheri Byrne-Haber (disabled) recommends that face verification should not be the only way to verify, and the alternative path must be as accessible as the primary path.

Set Studio conducted an experiment to answer “how fragmented are viewport sizes?”. They gathered over 120,000 datapoints with over 2,300 unique viewport sizes. That means “If you tend to build with very specific breakpoints and hard values for typography, sizing and spacing, you might find that even with the best intentions, you’re not providing the optimal user experience. So, create flexible rules and allow the browser to do what it does best: calculate the best outcome based on the conditions it finds itself in.”

A story of a blind cybersecurity professional. Juan Mathews Rebello Santos identified and reported a cybersecurity vulnerability involving NVDA, and he mentioned, “If accessibility tools become insecure, millions of disabled people become vulnerable.” He is also working to make the security field inclusive for all, such as by creating authentication systems that do not rely entirely on visual interaction. He is also creating cybersecurity resources in Portuguese for students in Brazil and is writing a book for ordinary people who are not knowledgeable about cybersecurity. This is why being inclusive in the field of technology is so important. A blind person thinks about creating a link between assistive technologies and cybersecurity. He is also facilitating learning, perhaps inspired by the challenges he has experienced.

The Digital Accessibility Workshop includes interactive exercises across nine different topics that show how people with disabilities experience the digital environment. This is a good resource to see what accessibility is. There are different resources in the workshop, such as dyslexia simulators in the language section, color simulators in the vision and color section, and quizzes that you can interact with.

A great “what we learned” article. GitHub is piloting an accessibility agent to provide engineers with reliable answers to accessibility questions and automatically catch and remediate simple accessibility issues before production. The agent has proven to be most effective when trained on manually audited issues specific to the platform, efficient with token consumption through sub-agents, and more accurate when following methodical instructions and using preformatted templates. GitHub plans to open source the agent.

This is not directly a digital accessibility piece, but I love this kind of framework for facilitating “big” discussions like vision and definition of a project. To define a project, you have to fill 6 blanks in La Carte Blanche created by Stéphanie Walter: “My project is… , My users are… , They struggle with… , It helps them… , They use it when… , It’s a success if…” This framework can also be used for defining project goals for accessibility, like this: “My project is an e-commerce mobile app’s ordering feature, My users are blind people, They struggle with navigating the app with their screen reader, It helps them to order things independently, They use it when they want to order something quickly, It’s a success if a blind user can order something as fast as a non-assistive-technology user.”

“Most LLMs optimize for visual output while generating near-zero semantic information for the layer that assistive technologies actually read. This article explains the architectural reasons and presents a five-layer enforcement system of prompt constraints. These include static analysis, runtime testing, CI integration, and accessible component abstractions that make semantic correctness automatic rather than aspirational. “ The most useful and practical article on accessibility and AI that I have ever read.

AI sometimes causes privacy issues, but it is really democratizing the field. Everyone can build their own app by emphasizing their own favorite feature. In this article, TongueType is created mainly for privacy reasons. For TongueType, “nothing is uploaded. Nothing is logged. There’s no account to create. Zero telemetry. Your voice never leaves your Mac.” You can protect your privacy while using a voice dictation app for accessibility.

A browser app summarizing our modern world, where everyone has attention issues. There are so many apps, and every app has many features that we do not use. That’s why simplicity and minimalism will be the new trend in the near future. Blank Page is an interesting app by simplifying the oldest and easiest task in the world: Writing. World and technology are so complex that we should simplify every task, even the most basic ones. Or should we?

Due to the low level of documentation of assistive technology behavior, accessibility best practices, and real-world usability failures, AI sometimes misses some of the more nuanced accessibility issues. So, Russ Weakley suggests that: “Use AI to understand the theory, the spec, and the named patterns. Don’t use it to confirm that something works.” To read an article about how to guide AI to the right information, look at the article below.

One of the best definitions of AI that I have ever seen from Juan Olarte : “AI does not give you knowledge, it gives you patterns based on what you provide.” In his LinkedIn article, Juan Olarte explains why we teach AI where to look and suggests practical tips on how we structure prompts. Especially in the field of accessibility, where there is a lot of incorrect or outdated information online, we should guide AI to the right place.

Sometimes even if you remediate all of the accessibility issues, your app doesn’t work perfectly. After a long work, you can still encounter small but annoying bugs. This mainly stems from usability issues of screen readers or some situational bugs. Lucy Greco mentioned an annoying issue with VoiceOver and exemplified an accessibility issue in iOS’s own app. It is clear that Apple doesn’t do its best for accessibility.

In April, Ryan Jones visited four airports across the United States to experience accessibility of self‑service kiosks. In the U.S., the Department of Transportation (DOT) has strict accessibility regulations, such as the Air Carrier Access Act, but Jones’s experience highlights a low level of implementation. In the article he notes that accessibility hardware is often present but non‑functional, low usage volumes make accessibility impractical, only wheelchair accessibility is implemented under the banner of ADA compliance, and accessibility appears on the first page but not integrated into the user flow.

I love stories about AI democratizing the world. In the article, a blind student experiments with an AI solution to understand visual layouts and participate in design courses equally. Even though the output is a failure, this is a hopeful journey that “AI will become the ‘visual eyes’ for blind designers, developers, and students, allowing us not only to participate in design courses, but also to master the visual language that has long been a barrier.”

“It is predicted that AI agent activity on the web will surpass human‑driven search activity by the end of 2026. An AI agent parses the same accessibility structure that a screen reader does. Therefore, when accessibility work is done well, AI agents can navigate, read, and act on the site.” For now, accessibility is important not only for SEO, but also for Answer Engine Optimization (AEO).

To make a product understandable and usable for everyone, eliminating cognitive overload is essential. That’s why I am trying to learn about minimalist design. In that sense, the “Remove before you add” principle mentioned in the article seems like a good recommendation.

“A new setting adds a decision the user didn’t ask to make, a new screen introduces a path that needs to be learned, and a new component means one more thing to maintain, document, and keep consistent across the product.”

Session timeouts are one of the most challenging accessibility issues. A poorly designed timeout function creates critical barriers for various disability groups, including motor, visual, and cognitive impairments. In the article, design patterns such as an advance‑warning system, extend functionality, auto‑save, and progress preservation are explained and exemplified.

Short answer: While there is no agreed‑upon answer, most professionals consider that issues with Windows High Contrast Mode do not violate WCAG 2.1. On the other hand, it is an important usability problem that should be fixed. For me, Windows High Contrast Mode is like a screen reader. I use it in my daily tasks and on every website because bright backgrounds really disturb my eyes. But, incompatibility with Windows High Contrast Mode force me to change my settings each time - you can see the examples of some issues below. In my opinion, Windows High Contrast Mode can be treated as an assistive technology, and a digital product’s compatibility with different color modes should be within the scope of WCAG (maybe in WCAG 3).

Answering the “What is our accessibility score?” question is one of the most annoying and difficult tasks in the digital‑accessibility field. Google Lighthouse’s score or the number of issues detected by Axe‑core give us only a generic view and can be misleading. Most scoring frameworks treat every issue type at the same level, this is also not the case. The Suc‑o‑meter framework considers both the location of the issue and its severity, producing a single overall score. In the article, the definitions of flows and severity are provided. In this YouTube video, you can see the implementation of the Suc‑o‑meter.

An article mentions why using AI for the sake of AI is not meaningful. AI accelerates almost all processes, including the speed of writing code. On the other hand, Andrew Murphy emphasizes that identifying the value stream—in other words, understanding what you are doing and why—is much more important. The article does not explicitly mention accessibility, but I think there is a clear link. Focusing only on output and speed will negatively impact accessibility, and, that’s why, our work is deeply integrated into the value stream. In short, we have to think about processes before we think about outputs.

Adobe discovered that several widely used typefaces fail basic accessibility checks. Helvetica, Arial, and Gill Sans are among the fonts that did not pass. Designers are advised to test the iIl1 combination, ensure that the letters b, d, p, and q are not too closely mirrored, avoid condensed or ultra‑light fonts for body text, and use larger default text sizes with wider line spacing before selecting a typeface. According to the article, choosing an inaccessible font can raise legal issues when materials are difficult to read and alternative formats are not provided.

One of the most striking data from the WebAIM Million is the average number of elements on the homepage, 1,437, which is 22.5 % higher than the previous year. The report concluded that vibe coding can be an issue for that. Also, in this article it is stated that: “AI models are trained on existing design patterns. The patterns that got us to 1,437 elements and 56 errors per page. AI generating layouts from those patterns compounds the problem with a tool that has zero sense of the user’s emotional state and no ability to feel the difference between calming and triggering.” As a conclusion, every UX designer is invited to conduct a “75‑year‑old test” by asking this question: Can a 75‑year‑old with low vision use this site successfully?

The previous article shows us why AI and vibe coding can be risky for accessibility, but we shouldn’t take a negative stance, I think. Because the quality of vibe coding depends on the quality of our prompts and AI‑agent configuration. At this point, Intopia has released Intopia Web Accessibility Skills, including a SKILL.md file with a library of supporting resources. They mentioned that they are still testing the clarity and flexibility of the guidance. In the article, you can see an example of how the SKILL is used.

An article discusses the government’s decision to use Times New Roman for “decorum and professionalism.” Times New Roman is a serif typeface, and on screens—especially at smaller sizes—“every serif tail starts to become another small obstacle.” For this reason, the writer advocates using Calibri like in 2023. I admit that Calibri is better than Times New Roman in a digital environment, but Calibri also has several accessibility issues. In simple terms, it is a font that cannot pass the “1 i I l” test. The article presents many strong arguments and a very clear statement emphasizing the importance of font selection. I think a better alternative than Calibri could be recommended.

AB 2190 is a bill introduced in the California Legislature, and it “would allow businesses to limit their liability for accessibility barriers if they can show that they made ‘good faith efforts’ to comply with accessibility standards.” In this article, the subjective “good faith” term and its impact are discussed. Especially with rising technology, and as accessibility overlays or AI agents can be used, “good faith” can be claimed very easily. So, this bill should be revised in today’s world.

The article describes a blind patient’s experience with the NHS booking app. “Apps, portals, online booking platforms—they are meant to make things more efficient, but for many of us, they do the opposite.” This is what inaccessible apps feel like. The article also shows that alternatives for booking include touch-screen devices in the hospital or a paper form. For a basic right like access to healthcare, these kinds of barriers should not exist.

IAAP organised a workshop in Dublin to discuss EAA implementation and the EN 301 549 European accessibility standards. The opening day featured a workshop that provided a deep dive into the requirements of EN 301 549. The article show that some criteria—especially those that are not direct counterparts of WCAG—still need more clarification. There are few EN 301 549 professionals, so notes from these kinds of workshops are very valuable. The recording of Day 2 can be found on the IAAP YouTube channel. Here is the link to a panel discussion featuring members of European surveillance authorities.

Most of the features offered by accessibility overlays can be controlled through system settings or browsers, so many accessibility specialists argue that investing in these kinds of extensions is unnecessary. In his blog, Adrian Roselli explains how a browser’s reading mode can be used as an embedded screen reader—one of the most commonly used features of accessibility overlays.

A talk with concrete messages by Charlie Triplett: “You can’t change the way people think. All you can do is give them a tool.” So, we can use Jira tickets and acceptance criteria to get people to think about accessibility. In the talk, many examples show how accessibility can be integrated into Jira tickets. Sometimes, when we focus too much on “organizational culture” and “inclusivity” concepts, it feels like we’re talking about nothing to me. That’s why I love talks that concentrate on real, practical tools.

Karl Groves wrote a review of WCAG 3. While many issues are still missing, we now have a sense of the direction it’s heading. In the article, the framing of success criteria as outcome statements, the emphasis on assertions and process, the coverage of cognitive accessibility, and the conformance model are highlighted as positive features. You can read this piece before diving into WCAG 3 as a useful starting point to get a quick glance at what’s happening.

Recently, I started testing the accessibility of focus indicators in our digital products, but sometimes understanding WCAG criteria and applying it can be overwhelming. Pope Tech provides easy-to-understand guidelines for most accessibility issues. I benefited from the “Common Pitfalls” section the most, due to the solution suggestions they provided.

Generally, I don't love checklists because they often create more questions than answers due to their summarized nature. However, Equalize Digital has created a customizable component-based checklist and made it available on Google Sheets. You can select the criteria that are relevant to your needs and add additional columns if necessary. It's a great starting point for creating internal checklists.

I solve this quiz every 3 months to refresh my knowledge. It's funnier than reading the WCAG Understanding Documents. Try it and see how non-text contrast accessibility can be tricky and confusing.

Elise Kristiansen talks about some WCAG rules and 'shows' their impact on users. This is the most interactive Accessibility 101 presentation I have ever seen. I enjoyed the language and focus order slides the most. She did what can be done with a PowerPoint presentation.

There are some user needs that accessibility standards cannot cover. At this point, AI and vibe coding can be a solution. This article is a great example of that and has inspired me to work on a high-contrast adaptability tool.

Oliver Schöndorfer's Font Friday is back! Fonts are important for accessibility, especially for people with dyslexia and partially-sighted, like me. However, there is no clear guidance on how to choose fonts. I learned a lot from Oskar's blog and YouTube videos on typography and readability. Font Friday is his weekly evaluation of selected fonts.

In the last issue I mentioned Accessibility Stage of CES and I approached this segregated corner with a positive attitude. Lucy Greco helped me look at the issue from a different perspective. She wrote: “This separation made finding these products incredibly difficult, and mainstream media largely ignored both disability-specific items and the accessibility of mainstream technology.” And she shares her hope for integration. True. On the other hand, I still believe the value of spotlighting accessibility solutions in a dedicated space. I found CES thanks to this stage like many other non-western accessibility professionals. In the long run, I agree with Lucy but I believe our advocacy power and we still need say “accessible” for something to find it.

Sometimes showing what accessibility means is much more easier than talking. This is a great article includes visuals showing how same content perceived differently by different users including colour blindness, low vision or dyslexia. Universal design tips are also included.

I love user story articles rather than technical ones on standards. This is the summary of what a blind user experienced in a mobile banking app and this is a very clear explanation of how accessibility issues impact users. I think Accessibility 101 courses should start with this kind of user stories rather than standards.

Apple published a great video introducing its accessibility solutions and showcasing how persons with disabilities use technology. The video also provides one of the best definitions of assistive technology in the lyrics: “And I need stuff. And you need stuff. And all our stuff is not the same”

While axe-con 2026 is approaching, I would like to share my favorite session from last year. November Champion shares useful insights from the field and highlights the key skills that should be gained as accessibility specialist.

One of the most powerful tech event CES included an accessibility stage and hosted many accessibility sessions ranging from accessible gaming to AgeTech in its 2026 edition. I couldn’t watch each of the session but I took some notes from Impact of AI on Neurodiversity:

AI can help neurodivergents to define personal needs versus generalized.

Neurodivergency can be a strength sometimes. For example, dyslexic thinking may come with distinct set of cognitive skills like creativity, visualization and problem-solving. So, with an equitable AI approach, “could AI help capture the essence of dyslexic thinking for non-dyslexic-thinkers to use?”

There is a correlation between relying on AI and decreased critical thinking skills. CORRELATION DOES NOT MEAN CAUSATION. In the age of AI, brain is changing and may be definition of neurodivergency will change in the future.

An interesting and simple solution for visual dyslexics to enhance their reading. Summerbell turns linear text into a rainbow-shaped text to decrease cognitive overload and improve comprehension. Not sure if it works, but I'll give it a try.

A striking blog post explains why we need simplicity. Josh Winn, a web developer, wrote about his experience during and after Hurricane Helene and how he couldn't reach information. He clearly emphasized our need for simple websites and apps that can work on low loading speed caused by crisis when infrastructure collapses. As someone from Turkey, an earthquake-prone region, I hope we can do it.

A great post explains how AI assistants can be trained for accessibility. In the article, there is a link for a GitHub project contains valuable resources as well.