Accessibility

This site targets WCAG 2.2 Level AA. That is the current W3C Recommendation and a superset of WCAG 2.1 AA, which is the standard the European Accessibility Act and EN 301 549 currently cite.

What has been verified

Each of these was measured by an automated audit run at 375, 768 and 1440 pixels, or computed directly from the stylesheet.

• Colour contrast — all 26 semantic token pairs computed against WCAG 2.2, truncated rather than rounded, in both light and dark themes.
• No horizontal scrolling at 375, 768 or 1440 pixels wide.
• Every interactive control is at least 44 by 44 CSS pixels, above the 24-pixel minimum.
• One h1 per page, headings in order, and main, nav and footer landmarks present.
• A visible focus indicator on every control, checked by an automated pass at three viewport widths.
• A skip link that is positioned off-screen rather than hidden, so it stays in the tab order.
• Every image conveying meaning has alternative text; decorative icons are hidden from assistive technology.
• Availability is never signalled by colour alone — unavailable dates are struck through and say so in their accessible name.
• Motion respects prefers-reduced-motion.

What has not been verified

Stated plainly, because a statement that lists only successes is marketing rather than a statement.

• No testing with real screen-reader users has been carried out.
• Keyboard navigation has been checked programmatically but not by a person working through every flow by hand.
• Text has not been tested at 200 per cent browser zoom, nor with the WCAG 1.4.12 text-spacing overrides applied.
• Alternative text quality cannot be judged automatically, and no photography has been added yet.
• Automated tooling catches roughly a third of accessibility failures. A clean automated pass is necessary and never sufficient.