Available
Know where you stand with the regulations, criterion by criterion
An automated audit tells you what fails. To know whether you comply, you need more: the rules that apply to you, a manual review and evidence of what you have done. SiteNorma organises it all in a matrix.
A regulatory profile for each website
An online shop is not the same as a town council’s website. The profile decides what is mandatory and what is good practice, which document is the main one and how reports are worded.
| Profile | Legislation | Main document | What we check as mandatory |
|---|---|---|---|
| Private service (European Accessibility Act) | Law 11/2023, which transposes Directive (EU) 2019/882 | Service accessibility information (Annex V) | Annex I requirements. On the website, WCAG 2.2 AA through EN 301 549 as the technical reference. For e-commerce, also accessibility information about the products, and accessible identification and payment. |
| Public sector | Royal Decree 1112/2018, which transposes Directive (EU) 2016/2102 | Accessibility statement (model in Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1523) | An “Accessibility” link on every page, a statement reviewed in the last 12 months, a feedback mechanism with a reply within 20 working days, a complaints procedure and expert manual review. |
| Voluntary | No specific legal obligation | Optional accessibility statement | WCAG 2.2 AA as a good-practice target. |
The compliance matrix
Each criterion in the standard has a status, with its evidence, the affected pages, who reviewed it and when. You can view the matrix against EN 301 549 v3.2.1, the version currently cited in the Official Journal of the EU (50 WCAG 2.1 A and AA success criteria), or against v4.1.1, which is based on WCAG 2.2 (55 success criteria).
The five statuses
- Fails (detected)
- There is a failure confirmed by the automated tests, or a review marked “It’s an issue”.
- No automated issues: needs manual review
- We have not detected any failures, but that does not prove the criterion is met.
- Passes (reviewed)
- A person has reviewed it, with a date and evidence. It is never marked automatically.
- Not applicable (justified)
- There is no content of that type. It requires a justification, and it is not allowed if the engine detects that the criterion does apply, for example when there is a video.
- Pending
- Nobody has reviewed it yet.
| WCAG success criterion | EN 301 549 | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1.1.1 Non-text Content | 9.1.1.1 | Fails (detected) |
| 1.2.2 Captions (Prerecorded) | 9.1.2.2 | Not applicable (justified) |
| 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence | 9.1.3.2 | No automated issues: needs manual review |
| 2.4.7 Focus Visible | 9.2.4.7 | Passes (reviewed) |
| 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum) | 9.3.3.8 (v4.1.1 only) | Pending |
Guided manual review
Manual review is the part that no tool can do for you. Your team does it, and we guide you so that it is quick and rigorous:
- A procedure in Spanish for each criterion: what to look at, how to test it and what counts as a failure.
- A suggested page sample based on the methodology in Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1524.
- Each answer records the reviewer, date, pages and evidence. A review expires after 12 months.
- The result feeds into the matrix automatically. The automated score and the review progress are shown separately: for now, reviews do not change the score.
The sample we suggest
- Home page, user login, site map, contact and help.
- Legal pages and the accessibility statement itself.
- One page for each service, and search.
- Complete processes, such as from basket to payment.
- One page for each distinct template, and downloadable documents.
- At least 10% of pages, chosen at random.
Evidence archive
We keep a record of your scans, reviews and document versions that cannot be changed. If an authority, a client or your own team asks you for evidence, you can export it with dates and versions.
Profile checks in every scan
As well as the accessibility rules, every scan checks what your profile requires. For example, in the public sector profile we check that the “Accessibility” link appears on every page, that the statement is less than 12 months old and that the feedback form works.
The matrix reflects your evaluation
The matrix organises the information, but the status of each criterion depends on the review being complete and truthful. That is why we never mark anything as “Passes” without human review, and we never suggest declaring a website “fully compliant” automatically.
Start using SiteNorma
Create your account and start improving your website’s accessibility. The Free plan includes 10 scanned pages a month, with no card required.