What WCAG 2.2 triage looks like
Start with automated detection of labels, contrast, names, ARIA validity, and other repeatable defects that block users or create noisy audit findings.
Accessibility guide
WCAG 2.2 is the success-criteria set most modern accessibility programs should plan around. AccessibilityScore.in helps teams triage common technical failures with axe-core.
A WCAG 2.2 checker is useful for finding many code-level failures quickly, but WCAG 2.2 conformance still requires evaluating criteria that automation cannot reliably judge.
Start with automated detection of labels, contrast, names, ARIA validity, and other repeatable defects that block users or create noisy audit findings.
Some WCAG 2.2 criteria involve focus appearance, dragging movements, target size, and authentication flows that need careful manual evaluation.
Fix automated findings first, then validate representative pages and tasks with keyboard and assistive technology testing against WCAG 2.2.
No. It supports WCAG 2.2 triage. Conformance requires reviewing all applicable success criteria, including those that need human judgment.
Yes, when contracts or laws name WCAG 2.1. In practice, planning around WCAG 2.2 usually covers 2.1 criteria plus newer requirements.