Accessibility · tested August 22, 2026
What was tested here, what failed, and what got fixed.
Most accessibility statements are a paragraph promising a commitment. This one lists the actual checks, the actual numbers, and the two real defects the check found on this site, because a page selling site audits should be able to survive one.
The target is WCAG 2.1 Level AA. That is the standard most US accessibility expectations point at, including the Department of Justice's 2024 web rule for state and local government, which is not binding on a business this size but is the clearest available benchmark. I do not claim full conformance, because a claim like that from one person with no formal audit behind it is not worth much. What I claim is that specific things were measured, and here they are.
Found and fixed
Two defects this check caught
The skip link never appeared. Every page had a "skip to content" link positioned off screen, which is correct, with nothing to bring it back on screen when focused, which is not. A keyboard user could tab to a link they could not see. Fixed: it now appears pinned to the top left the moment it takes focus.
The main button failed contrast. White text on the bright orange measured 3.54:1, under the 4.5:1 minimum for normal text. Same for the small orange labels above each section heading, at 3.64:1. Fixed: buttons and small text now use a deeper shade of the same orange, measured at 5.77:1 and 5.94:1.
Measured, not assumed
What the numbers are now
Contrast, against white
Text colors
- Body text: 17.3:1
- Secondary text: 10.0:1
- Muted and label text: 6.0:1
- Links and small accent text: 5.9:1
- Button label on its background: 5.8:1
- AA requires 4.5:1 for normal text, 3:1 for large
Structure and input
What else was checked
- Every image carries alt text
- Every form field has a real label, not a placeholder standing in for one
- Visible focus outline on every interactive element
- Page language declared, headings in order, one h1 per page
- Animation respects the reduce-motion setting in your OS
- Layout works down to a 320 pixel wide screen
Still imperfect
What I know is not solved
reCAPTCHA on the two forms. Any visual challenge is a barrier, and Google's audio fallback is not a great experience. It is there because without it the forms fill with spam. If it blocks you, email jay@craftvane.com or call and the form is not needed at all.
The chat window has been fixed but not yet driven with a real screen reader. A code review of it found three genuine problems, now fixed: replies arrived in a container with no live region, so a screen reader user would send a message and never be told an answer came back; closing the panel dropped focus onto nothing instead of returning it to the button that opened it; and Escape did not close it. The message bubbles also failed contrast, at the same 3.54:1 as the buttons, and now match the rest of the site. What I still have not done is sit down with VoiceOver or NVDA and drive the whole conversation, so I am not claiming it works, only that the known defects are gone. Everything the chatbot can tell you is also written on the pages, and the phone number gets you a person.
No independent audit. These numbers were measured by the person who built the site. That is better than nothing and worse than a third party, and you should read it that way.
If something here blocks you
Email jay@craftvane.com or call 415-879-5541 and tell me what happened and what you were using. I will fix it and reply when it is done. There is no ticket queue and no accessibility department, which means it goes straight to the person who can change the code.
Why this page exists in this form
Craftvane sells site audits. Publishing a vague commitment statement while the site itself failed two checks would be the exact thing the audit is supposed to catch. So the check got run here first, and this page is the result, including the parts that did not pass.