accessibility-review

# Accessibility Review Catch the issues that block users before they reach engineering. Most accessibility failures are predictable from the design alone. ## WCAG 2.1 AA quick reference **Perceivable** - 1.1.1 — Non-text content has alt text. - 1.3.1 — Structure and meaning conveyed semantically, not visually. - 1.4.3 — Contrast ≥ 4.5:1 for body text, ≥ 3:1 for large text (18px+). - 1.4.11 — Non-text contrast ≥ 3:1 for UI components and meaningful graphics. **Operable** - 2.1.1 — All functionality available by keyboard. - 2.4.3 — Logical focus order matches the visible reading order. - 2.4.7 — Focus indicator is visible and not hidden by `outline: none`. - 2.5.5 — Touch target ≥ 44×44 CSS pixels. **Understandable** - 3.2.1 — Predictable on focus; no unexpected context changes. - 3.3.1 — Errors are identified clearly and tied to the failing field. - 3.3.2 — Inputs have visible labels or instructions, not just placeholders. **Robust** - 4.1.2 — Every interactive control has a name, role, and value exposed to assistive tech. ## Common issues to look for first 1. Insufficient color contrast — especially gray-on-white body text and brand-color CTAs. 2. Form fields with placeholder-as-label (placeholder disappears on focus). 3. Click targets under 44×44. 4. Focus indicators removed in CSS without a replacement. 5. Modals that trap focus incorrectly (or don't trap at all). 6. Color used as the only signal (red text alone for errors, green-only success). 7. Icon-only butt...