What is WCAG 2.2? Guidelines for accessibility

All criteria in WCAG 2.2 fall under four principles. The WCAG guidelines are built so each principle asks a clear question. Perceivable: information must be visible or audible to everyone, for instance through alt texts on images and captions on video. Operable: every function must also work without a mouse, using a keyboard or voice control. Understandable: copy, navigation and error messages must be clear. Robust: the site must work well with different browsers and assistive technology, such as screen readers.

Each principle is broken down into concrete success criteria. Think of a minimum contrast ratio of 4.5:1 for normal text, a visible focus indicator during keyboard navigation, form fields with an associated label, and touch targets large enough to hit with a thumb. Working through these criteria systematically does not only solve 'compliance'; it also removes friction that every visitor feels on phone and desktop.

The principles are deliberately technology-agnostic. Whether you build a classic HTML site, a single-page app or a native webview: the question remains whether someone with an impairment can complete the task. That makes the WCAG guidelines a stable yardstick across design, development and periodic scans.

WCAG has three levels. Level A covers the absolute basics; without those criteria a site is unusable for some groups. Level AA is the legal and practical norm for governments and, through the European Accessibility Act, for many commercial services. Level AAA is the strictest level and rarely fully achievable for an entire site; it fits better for specific components or audiences.

For e-commerce services, regulator ACM points to WCAG level AA as the practical reading of the accessibility requirements. Meeting AA covers most of what legislation and users reasonably expect. AAA is not the legal default; only promise it if you can truly deliver that part.

WCAG 2.2 is the current W3C recommendation and adds a limited number of criteria to 2.1, including visible focus, drag movements and the size of click and touch targets. Anything that meets 2.2 also meets 2.1. For new builds or a serious rebuild there is no reason to keep testing against 2.1.

In Europe, legislation refers to WCAG through the EN 301 549 standard. Digitoegankelijk explains how that European ICT standard and WCAG relate: for web content, the WCAG criteria are the relevant part. ACM advises businesses to work with WCAG 2.2 straight away, so you do not have to rework later.

Overlap with mobile-friendliness is largest here. Criteria on target size and focus are exactly the failures that hurt on phones. Taking 2.2 AA seriously often improves mobile conversion at the same time.

WCAG itself is a technical standard, not a law. Dutch and European rules refer to it. Public bodies fall under the government accessibility decree; Digitoegankelijk describes who that covers. For businesses the European Accessibility Act has applied since 28 June 2025 to e-commerce services among others; see that page for the legal details and exemptions.

According to the ACM, that duty applies to providers with 10 or more employees or annual turnover above 2 million euros. Micro-enterprises below both thresholds are exempt. The technical yardstick remains WCAG AA (via EN 301 549). A quality mark is not legally required; the law demands that your service is accessible, not that you display a sticker.

Alongside the technical check, public status documentation often applies. Governments and many e-commerce services must publish an accessibility statement; that page explains when it is required and what it must cover. For the broader explanation of duties and a practical approach, see digital accessibility. This page stays on the technical depth: what WCAG is, how the levels work, and how you test.

Automated tools find the measurable problems: missing alt texts, contrast errors, empty buttons, missing labels and errors in the HTML structure. That is the fastest way to surface the biggest issues. A full WCAG audit also requires manual research, because criteria such as understandable error messages and a logical reading order cannot be judged by a machine. Expect roughly 30 to 50 percent of success criteria that a tool can check reliably.

WebYes runs automated WCAG 2.2 AA checks within the accessibility pillar, alongside speed, security and mobile. The free scan covers up to six pages; a full audit up to fifteen, sitemap-led. The quality mark requires an average score of at least 80 and at least 60 per pillar: a strong speed score does not compensate for systematic a11y failures.

A practical approach: measure where you stand first, fix the blockers (labels, contrast, empty buttons, keyboard traps), then walk through the key tasks (ordering, contacting, logging in) manually with a keyboard and screen reader. Repeat after major releases. Accessibility is not a one-off project; every new feature can introduce new barriers. Document what you still need to test manually beside the scan, so you do not confuse 30-50% machine coverage with full AA conformity.