This is a website about disability access. It would be a poor one if it were not
accessible itself. This page states the standard we work to, what we actually do, where we currently
fall short, and how to tell us when we get it wrong.
Our commitment
We are committed to making this site usable by everyone, including people who use screen readers,
keyboard navigation, voice control, magnification, and other assistive technology.
That commitment is not decorative here. This entire record exists because institutions treated
access as optional. A site making that argument has to hold itself to the standard it is asking of
others, in public, where anyone can check.
The standard we aim for
We work toward conformance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1, Level AA.
That is the same standard United States courts apply to websites.
We say “work toward” deliberately. This site is built and maintained by one disabled person using
assistive technology. Claiming full conformance would be easy and it would not be true, and an
inaccurate accessibility statement is its own kind of barrier.
What we do
- Clear heading structure. One H1 per page, headings in order, so a screen reader
user can navigate by heading rather than reading everything. - Descriptive links. Link text says where it goes. No “click here” and no bare
dates. - Text alternatives for images. Every document image carries alt text describing
what the document is, who wrote it, and when. - Transcripts of source documents. Where a document appears as an image, the text
of that document is being added to the page itself, as real text, so it can be read by a screen
reader rather than described in a sentence. This work is in progress and is the single largest
accessibility improvement underway on this site. - Labelled form fields, so assistive technology announces what each field is
for. - Sufficient colour contrast and visible focus indicators, so the site works for
low vision users and for anyone navigating by keyboard. - Redactions announced, not skipped. Redacted names and contact details are marked
so assistive technology says “redacted” rather than passing over the gap in silence. A screen reader
user should know something was removed. - Language attributes on Spanish passages, so a screen reader pronounces them
correctly. - Plain language. Short sentences. Defined terms. A glossary
for the ones that recur.
Known limitations
We would rather list these than pretend they do not exist.
- Document images without on-page transcripts. A number of pages still present a
document as an image with alt text only. Alt text describes a document. It is not the document.
Transcription is underway. - Some images are placeholders. A small number of image files on this site are
blank. Where we find them, we replace them. If you land on one, please tell us. - Long pages. Some record pages are very long. We are adding in-page navigation so
you do not have to travel the whole thing to reach one section. - One maintainer. This site is built by one disabled person. Fixes happen at the
speed one pair of hands allows, and those hands are the reason this site exists.
Tell us
If any part of this site is difficult to use, email
info@adamatters.com and describe the page and the problem.
You do not need to know the technical term for it. “The third document on this page reads as an empty
box” is a perfect bug report.
We will respond, and we will tell you what we did.
Reporting a barrier here is exactly the kind of thing every institution should make easy. We try
to.
Why this page has a standard, a list, and an email address
Three things make an accessibility statement real rather than decorative. A named standard, so you
know what is being claimed. A list of known gaps, so you know it was written by someone who looked. A
working route to report a problem, so you can do something about it.
Several institutions in this record publish no accessibility statement at all, no named contact,
and no grievance procedure.
What a published route is supposed to look like is
here. What other bars publish is here.
We are not going to argue that those routes matter and then fail to provide one.
Frequently asked questions
What accessibility standard does this site work to?
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1, Level AA, the same standard United States courts apply to websites. We say work toward deliberately, because the site is built and maintained by one disabled person using assistive technology.
How do I report an accessibility barrier on this site?
Email info@adamatters.com and describe the page and the problem. You do not need the technical term. The third document on this page reads as an empty box is a perfect bug report.
What are the known accessibility limitations here?
Some pages still present a document as an image with alt text only, and transcription is underway. A small number of image files are blank and are replaced when found. Some record pages are very long and in-page navigation is being added.
Why does this site publish its own accessibility gaps?
Three things make an accessibility statement real rather than decorative: a named standard, a list of known gaps, and a working route to report a problem. Several institutions in this record publish none of the three.