Accessibility

This site targets WCAG 2.2 Level AA. This page states plainly what has been done and what has not, rather than claiming compliance that has not been checked.

Built in from the start

• Every page works with no JavaScript; nothing depends on client-side script to be readable or navigable.
• Semantic HTML landmarks and heading structure, a skip-to-content link, and visible keyboard focus on every interactive element.
• No information is conveyed by color alone: the mark on a figure that sources give differently carries the words "Sources differ", not just a colored badge.
• Layout works down to narrow phone widths and up to large desktop screens, and respects your operating system's light/dark and reduced-motion settings.
• Tables use proper header cells and captions so a screen reader can announce what a figure belongs to.

Checked so far

An automated axe-core scan (WCAG 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 A and AA rules, plus best-practice checks) runs against representative pages at both desktop and phone widths: the home page, the all-models table, brand pages, several subject pages, all policy pages, search, the correction-report form, and the private triage page. It currently reports no violations.

The visual design was reworked on 2026-10-06. Every text and background colour pair, in the light and the dark theme, is now checked by an automated test against the WCAG AA contrast ratios. That test also caught two problems the earlier manual assessment missed: the keyboard focus ring and the borders of form fields were too faint against the page, and both were fixed.

A manual assessment against WCAG 2.2 AA was carried out on 2026-09-29, covering keyboard-only navigation with real focus-order and trap checking, independently computed color-contrast ratios for every light/dark color pairing, page reflow at 200%/400% zoom-equivalent widths, forced-colors (high-contrast) mode, reduced-motion behavior, and touch-target sizing against the WCAG 2.2 Success Criterion 2.5.8 minimum. It found and fixed two real issues: two unlabeled search regions on the search page that assistive technology could not tell apart, and two navigation areas (the on-page section links, the footer policy links) with touch targets below the 24px minimum. No other violations were found in what was tested. The assessment covered a representative set of pages, not every page.

What the assessment did not cover

This was a self-assessment carried out during the site's own build process, not an audit by an independent, named accessibility evaluator, and it did not include testing with actual screen-reader or switch-access software or by a person with a disability. No independent third-party audit against WCAG 2.2 AA has been carried out, so the site makes no formal conformance claim.

Reporting a problem

Use the correction and issue report form to flag an accessibility problem, and say in the message that it is an accessibility issue so it can be triaged correctly.