Accessibility Testing: Compliance Is Verified With Each Release

The RGAA requirements that are automatically checked: color contrast, text alternatives, form field labels, heading hierarchy, declared language, attributes of interactive components, and keyboard navigation.

No, and this needs to be made clear. A significant portion of the criteria requires human judgment: the relevance of a textual alternative, the clarity of wording, and the consistency of the reading order. Automation handles volume and repetition; it does not replace the audit.

Accessibility has long been a requirement in the public sector. For the private sector, the June 28, 2025, deadline set by the European Accessibility Directive extends this requirement to many online services, including e-commerce, banking, and transportation.

Yes, based on the same principle, using criteria specific to iOS and Android platforms. The review focuses on the labels of elements, contrast, and screen reader navigation.

Through the pathways that drive the service, not through the homepage. An inaccessible checkout process or contact form poses a real problem, whereas a non-compliant corporate page is merely a reporting issue.

Each check generates a downloadable report—in JSON format for your tools and in HTML format for your teams. It shows the number of tests that passed and failed, both as a count and as a percentage, and details each violation along with the relevant element.

A dedicated dashboard displays a score out of ten, a trend line for the selected time period, the success rate within the testable scope, and the breakdown of failures by severity: critical, serious, moderate, and minor. You can immediately see if a production deployment has compromised compliance.

No. The test is integrated into an existing workflow at the stage of your choice. The same scenario verifies that the funnel is working and that the pages it goes through remain compliant.

The scenario fails and triggers the same workflow as your other tests: incident, alert via email, text message, or webhook, and escalation to Jira or PagerDuty if you’ve integrated them. Accessibility is no longer just an annual audit—it’s now a continuous monitoring process.

Both—and there’s no contradiction there. The WCAG provides the international framework, while the RGAA is its French implementation and breaks down Level AA into criteria that can be verified one by one. Our scenarios are written based on the RGAA grid, which automatically covers the corresponding WCAG criteria. The European standard EN 301 549, which has been the regulatory reference since June 2025, is based on the same foundation.

Yes, in collaboration with our partners. The RGAA regulatory compliance audit is conducted with FACIL’iti: a ten-page report, a checklist covering 106 criteria, an accessibility statement, a multi-year compliance plan, a follow-up audit within three months, and partial audits in the following two years. Mr Suricate then ensures ongoing monitoring between audits.

Level AA, which is the target set by European regulations. Level AAA is not generally required anywhere and cannot be achieved for all content. We continuously verify the Level A and AA criteria, which are checked automatically; the audit covers those that require human judgment.

Yes. The design of the test plan, as well as the creation and maintenance of test scenarios, can be entrusted to Handirect, a company that employs people with disabilities, with 75% of its workforce consisting of individuals with disabilities. This service is eligible for credit toward your Agefiph filing.