Accessibility Statement

WebXLR8 is committed to ensuring digital accessibility for people with disabilities. This page says where this site actually stands rather than what we aim for, because an aim is not something you can check.

Conformance Status

This site partially conforms to WCAG 2.1 Level AA. Partially conforming means most of the standard is met and the exceptions are known; they are listed below by name.

The assessment was a self-evaluation carried out in August 2026 by the team that builds the site. No independent third-party audit has been commissioned. Contrast ratios were computed from the colour tokens in the stylesheet rather than estimated, and layout was measured in a running browser at 375, 768 and 1280 pixels wide.

What Has Been Tested

Across every route on the site, the assessment confirmed:

• One h1 per page, and no skipped heading levels.
• Every image carries descriptive alternative text; none is left empty or filled with a filename.
• No contrast failure among the colour pairs actually in use.
• Every form label is bound to a real input, and the two forms on a page use separate identifiers so they cannot collide.
• No horizontal scroll at 375, 768 or 1280 pixels.
• Every internal link resolves; no link is a placeholder.
• Card-shaped links use a single anchor rather than nesting one inside another.
• The scrolling client logo wall announces each brand once, not twice.
• Reveal, counter, media and magnetic effects, and the looping background videos behind the hero panels and the band, all honour prefers-reduced-motion. With it set, the backgrounds are still images.
• The product comparison table is a labelled, keyboard-reachable scroll region on narrow screens.
• Footer links meet the 44-pixel target size on mobile.

Known Limitations

Four things are known to fall short or to sit close to the line:

• The greyed second half of the two-tone display headings measures 3.22:1 against the light panel. That clears the 3:1 threshold WCAG sets for large text, but only just, and it would fail the 4.5:1 threshold if it were body copy. It is used only at display size.
• One link is smaller than the 44-pixel target: the email address inside the sentence shown when the contact form is not connected. WCAG 2.5.5 exempts links set inline in a block of text, and padding it would break the sentence it sits in.
• One paragraph in the Risknox case study runs to roughly 90 characters per line at desktop width, above the 80 that WCAG 1.4.8 recommends for readability. That criterion is Level AAA, not AA.
• The client logo wall and the technologies strip keep scrolling even whenprefers-reduced-motion is set. This is a deliberate departure from WCAG 2.2.2, which asks for a way to pause moving content: the strips are decorative, every brand they show is announced to assistive technology from static markup, and on hover-capable devices pointing at a strip pauses it. Every other animation on the site is disabled when reduced motion is requested.

What Has Not Been Assessed

Naming these matters as much as naming the passes. None of the following has been done, and no claim about them should be read into the section above:

• Independent third-party accessibility audit.
• Testing with screen readers — JAWS, NVDA, VoiceOver and TalkBack have not been run against this site.
• Testing with voice control, switch access, or screen magnification.
• Testing with users who have disabilities.
• WCAG 2.2, which adds criteria this assessment did not measure against.

Feedback

If you encounter an accessibility barrier on this site, please tell us at [email protected]. Describe the page and what you were trying to do; if you use assistive technology, naming it helps us reproduce the problem. We treat these as defects rather than suggestions, and we will tell you what we found either way.