We published an article on Zenn that explains the common points of confusion when implementing and testing accessibility

At Liberogic, we are continuously working to improve web accessibility. We have now published a series of articles on Zenn, a technical information sharing service, covering WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines), which is the guideline for web accessibility.

In this article, we introduce the background and motivation behind writing these pieces, along with an overview of each article.

We wanted to resolve the "why" behind WCAG

Through our daily work implementing and checking websites, we have encountered many points that leave us wondering: "How should I actually interpret this WCAG criterion?" and "Can I say this implementation is compliant?"

This initiative is part of my efforts to maintain and update my international accessibility credential, IAAP WAS (Web Accessibility Specialist). But more importantly, I wanted to organize the points that confuse everyone in practice and share them as field knowledge. I decided to compile these articles while also clarifying my own thinking.

WCAG compliance is not the "goal"—it is the "starting point"

The most important message I wanted to convey through these articles is that meeting all WCAG criteria does not mean becoming 100% accessible.

WCAG represents the "minimum standard" for enabling diverse users to access content, and it is merely the starting point of accessibility.

If you mechanically check off a checklist and focus solely on meeting conformance criteria, you may lose sight of whether the product truly works well for users.

That's precisely why we go beyond surface-level know-how like "implement it this way to comply." Instead, we dive deep into the background and intent behind "why these standards were created." By understanding the reasoning beneath the standards themselves, we believe you'll gain a more fundamental grasp of accessibility.

Published articles on Zenn

We've organized five articles by theme, each focusing on points that commonly cause confusion during implementation and review in real-world projects. Feel free to explore the topics that interest you.

WCAG confusion point ① Is px-based font sizing really acceptable?

We clarify px specification compliance in modern browser environments and explore the essence of "more accessible implementation" that respects user font size preferences. Read the article on Zenn

WCAG confusion point ② Does having multiple "View details" links violate 2.4.4 (Link purpose)?

We explain the boundary line of standards that comply when "appropriate context" is present. We also propose a deeper, UX-focused implementation approach to enhance efficiency for screen reader users. Read the article on Zenn

WCAG confusion point ③ When an image link lacks alt text, which standard does it violate?

This article focuses on sorting out complex situations where a single issue intersects multiple success criteria (1.1.1, 2.4.4, 4.1.2, etc.). We explain the relationships between standards and how to make judgments on points that often cause confusion during compliance audits. Read the article on Zenn

WCAG confusion point ④ Same appearance, but select is not OK while a custom dropdown is? Understanding 3.2.2 (On Input)

A deep dive into the W3C-defined difference between "preference changes" and "activate." Rather than being fooled by visual behavior, this article consolidates the thinking needed to make correct judgments based on element semantics and operation classification. Read the article on Zenn

WCAG Confusion Point ⑤: Where Did 4.1.1 Go? Which guideline covers HTML syntax errors?

This article unpacks the background behind the removal of 4.1.1 in WCAG 2.2, and explains how to reclassify existing syntax errors based on actual impact across other guidelines (1.3.1 and 4.1.2), including considerations for site quality. Read the article on Zenn

* Note: WCAG guidelines often contain complex and difficult-to-understand phrasing. Therefore, the explanations and judgment criteria in each article may include unique interpretations based on practical experience. We would appreciate it if you could refer to these articles alongside the official WCAG guidelines.

Conclusion

Web accessibility is not something you address once and finish—it is something you cultivate continuously.

We hope this output serves as a helpful reference for engineers, designers, and directors working daily on accessibility implementation and testing.

Liberogic is committed to continuing both technical sharing and hands-on practice to realize "websites and services that everyone can use easily." If you have questions about accessibility or feedback on our articles, please feel free to contact us!