WCAG 3.0: What marketers need to know

There is no confirmed final date. The working group is iterating drafts and expects multiple updates before a formal recommendation. WCAG 2.2 will continue to be required in many settings for years, and WCAG 2 will not be deprecated immediately after 3.0 is final. Plan on steady preparation rather than a switch over. Keep your teams focused on tangible outcomes and risk reduction now.

WCAG 2.2 uses principles and binary success criteria across Levels A, AA and AAA. WCAG 3.0 widens scope beyond web pages to apps, tools and emerging tech, and emphasises outcomes linked to user needs. Drafts explore a more nuanced way to evaluate quality, including rules for critical errors and journey based scope. Think less checklist at page level, more evidence of accessible tasks end to end.

Binary checks will still exist for many tests, but draft thinking moves toward graded evaluation that better reflects real experiences. For example, a process might score well overall but be blocked by a critical error. That makes risk clearer for leadership. Treat any specific points or percentages you see as exploratory. Use the direction to shape reporting that shows progress over time.

Fix outstanding WCAG 2.2 AA issues on top journeys. Add keyboard, focus and screen reader checks to your definition of done. Pilot outcome based reporting for two flows, ideally one revenue related and one support related. Refresh procurement clauses to require 2.2 AA today and request outcome reporting from vendors. Train design, content and engineering on accessible patterns and labelling, then publish or update your accessibility statement.

Expect more emphasis on journeys and processes, not only lists of pages. Audits will balance automated rules, targeted manual checks and usability sessions with assistive technology. Reporting will highlight critical errors, customer impact and improvement over time. You will still need traceability to specific requirements and test methods, but leaders will see clearer links between accessibility, risk, conversion and support costs.

Yes, but as part of a balanced approach. Automated tools catch common defects quickly and help prevent regressions in CI. They cannot replace checks for focus order, announcements, error recovery or the lived experience of assistive technology users. Combine automated, semi automated and guided manual testing. Tie findings to journeys, severity and business impact so teams know what to fix first.

If you sell or support EU facing products or services, the European Accessibility Act increases expectations on accessibility from 2025. Even where your legal duties are limited, buyers will push for accessible experiences and suppliers that can show credible testing. Use WCAG 2.2 AA as your baseline, document conformance, and pilot outcome based reporting for high risk journeys to demonstrate progress.

Ask for WCAG 2.2 AA as a contractual minimum and require outcome based reporting on defined journeys. Request evidence of accessible patterns, labelling and assistive technology checks in their definition of done. Agree how they will scope evaluations by views and processes. If scoring is adopted later, ensure their approach can map results into any new model without reworking the fundamentals.

Report by journey and impact, not only by page count or criteria ticked. Show which flows improved, which critical errors remain and how many customers are affected. Tie defects to revenue, support cost or regulatory risk. Include trend lines so leaders see progress month to month. Keep an appendix that maps findings to WCAG 2.2 AA and note how your approach aligns with WCAG 3.0 direction.

State that you target WCAG 2.2 AA, outline current conformance, list known issues with timelines, and explain how users can request alternatives or support. Add a brief note that you are piloting outcome based reporting on priority journeys to align with emerging WCAG 3.0 direction. Update the statement after each significant release and make sure support teams know how to respond to accessibility requests.

Start with your highest traffic or highest risk journeys. Fix easy wins that tools flag, then run short, guided checks for keyboard, focus and announcements. Use design system components with accessible defaults and add checks to pull requests. Schedule a lightweight user session with one or two assistive technology users each quarter. Track critical errors and celebrate reductions to keep momentum.

Yes. A well maintained design system turns fixes into reusable patterns, which reduces defects across products. Document accessible variants, required labels, error messaging and focus behaviour for each component. Add example code and test notes. When teams adopt outcome based reporting, the design system gives a shared toolkit that aligns engineering, content and design with what actually helps users complete tasks.

Track the number of critical errors on key journeys, time to resolution and regression rates after releases. Include assistive technology test coverage and pass rates for keyboard and focus. Add outcome metrics that matter to the business, such as conversion rate for accessible flows or reduced support contacts about blocked tasks. Show trends over time so improvement is visible and funding decisions are easier.

Editors can unlock quick gains with headings, descriptive link text, alt text for meaningful images and clear error messages. Provide templates that enforce structure. Use plain language and avoid images of text. When creating carousels or tables, check keyboard and screen reader behaviour. Include accessibility in briefs for agencies. Good content practice improves SEO, clarity and accessibility at the same time.

Allocate budget for remediation of 2.2 AA issues on priority journeys, accessibility training across roles, and at least one assisted user research session. Fund improvements to your design system and CI checks. If you rely on vendors, include time for outcome based reporting and journey based audits. This mix reduces risk now and positions you to map results into a WCAG 3.0 model later.

List the start and end points of each key journey, then identify the views involved, such as product list, product details, basket and checkout. Define what success looks like for users, including error recovery. Choose representative test data and assistive technology. Run rule based checks first, then guided manual tests and short user sessions. Report defects by step with severity and customer impact.