Accessibility Testing

Free tools like Lighthouse offer a one-off audit limited to a single page, without long-term tracking or a global view of the site. A professional automated solution covers the entire domain, schedules recurring audits, and records historical results to measure progress. It also provides extensive coverage of RGAA and WCAG criteria, whereas Lighthouse only checks a fraction of the rules. Finally, it facilitates collaboration between technical, design, and compliance teams through shared reports and remediation workflows.

The platform retains the history of every audit and allows users to visualize the evolution of the compliance rate over time. Each non-compliance issue is tracked until resolution, with assignments to the relevant teams and status updates. Scheduled audits (weekly, monthly) automatically alert teams in the event of a regression following an update. This continuity transforms accessibility from a one-off project into a continuous improvement process.

The RGAA criteria are organized by themes (images, colors, navigation, forms, multimedia, etc.) to allow teams to handle fixes by area of expertise. Each criterion is associated with its severity level, user impact, and concrete remediation examples. This segmentation facilitates the distribution of work among front-end developers, designers, and editorial contributors. It also helps prioritize corrections according to business or regulatory priorities.

The tool analyzes the semantic structure of the HTML (tags, landmarks, ARIA roles) and identifies elements that would cause problems for a screen reader. It verifies the presence and relevance of alternative text, tab order, heading structure, and form labels. The reports precisely pinpoint potential blockers and offer recommendations that comply with standards. This ensures a consistent experience for visually impaired or blind users.

Yes, the analysis scans all crawled pages on the domain and detects text/background combinations that do not meet the contrast thresholds required by the RGAA and WCAG. Each non-compliance issue is precisely located (URL, component, colors involved) to facilitate fixing it. The tool distinguishes between normal text and large text, which follow different thresholds. This global view prevents partial fixes that might leave issues unaddressed on secondary pages.

Browser extensions produce a one-off report on a single page, without context or tracking. The platform's reports cover the entire site, aggregate non-compliance issues, prioritize them, and offer actionable recommendations. They also include trend data, version comparisons, and indicators that can be shared with management or auditors. Finally, they are exportable in formats suited for official documentation (accessibility statements, multi-year plans).

Filters allow users to sort non-compliance issues by severity level, user impact, targeted type of disability, and estimated remediation effort. Blocking errors (which completely prevent access to content or a feature) are highlighted for high-priority handling. It is also possible to filter by template, site section, or assigned owner. This prioritization helps optimize efforts and achieve quick, visible improvements for users.