Perspective

Report accessibility evidence without overstating it

Say what you tested, what happened and what remains unknown instead of collapsing everything into an accessibility score.

Accessibility reports become less useful when certainty grows faster than the evidence.

Record the task

State what the person needed to accomplish, not only the component or page inspected.

Record the method and environment

Examples: keyboard-only in Chrome on Windows; VoiceOver with Safari on iOS; browser zoom at a named viewport; axe version/ruleset.

Record the result

Describe observed behaviour and impact. Where relevant, connect the failure to a standard separately from the observation.

Record the limit

Say what the test does not cover. “No automatically detectable violations found” is different from “accessible”.

Keep evidence types separate

Automated results, manual conformance review, assistive-technology testing, usability research and disabled-user testing answer different questions. Do not merge them into one percentage.

A compact format

Task → method → environment → result → evidence → limitation → follow-up.

What a good report enables

Another person should be able to understand what was actually established, reproduce important findings and see where further evidence is needed.