We're committed to making our online services as accessible as possible for all customers. This accessibility statement provides information, related to the council's Mylo website, on:
- accessibility of our online services
- requesting services in an accessible format
- reporting accessibility problems
- online services which don't currently meet accessibility standards
- online services exempt from accessibility standards
- ongoing improvements for increased accessibility
Accessibility of our online services
Our online services are designed to be used by as many people as possible; the text should be clear and simple to understand and you should be able to:
- change colours, contrast levels, font sizes and styles
- zoom in up to 300% without problems
- navigate most of our online services using just a keyboard
- use most of our online services with screen reader software
Most of our online services work when scripts, applets or other programmatic objects are turned off, or aren’t supported. However, your experience of using our website without scripts running may not be optimal.
Our online services are partially compliant with the latest Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, known as 'WCAG 2.1 AA'. Get details of online services which don't currently meet accessibility standards, and online services exempt from accessibility standards.
Requesting services in an accessible format
If you need information in a different format, email:email@example.com, and tell us:
- the location of the information (copy and paste the URL/address from your browser address bar)
- your name and email address (so we can respond)
- the format you need (for example, audio CD, braille, British Sign Language (BSL), large print, accessible PDF)
Our WDU Hub will respond within 5 working days to your request.
Reporting accessibility problems
If you find any accessibility problems that are not listed on this page, or you think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, email: firstname.lastname@example.org in the first instance so that we can work to resolve any issues.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) Accessibility Regulations.
Online services which don't currently meet accessibility standards
Some parts of our online services are non-compliant, meaning they don't currently meet accessibility standard 'WCAG 2.1 AA': in these cases:
- both our internal team who administers the website, and our external supplier, are working to improve accessibility standards
- we've provided a means of requesting services in an accessible format
Due to the amount of issues and the complexity of fixes, we'll continue to update this statement as we identify and resolve areas of non-compliance.
- There may be some failure conditions with the label element unable to explicitly associate a form control with a label. This technique is sufficient for Success Criteria 1.1.1, 1.3.1 and 4.1.2 whether or not the label element is visible. That is, it may be hidden using CSS. However, for Success Criterion 3.3.2, the label element must be visible since it provides assistance to all users who need help understanding the purpose of the field. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA success criterion H44.
- There may be some failure conditions when a change in the appearance of text conveys meaning without using appropriate semantic mark up. This failure also applies to images of text that are not enclosed in the appropriate semantic mark up. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA success criterion F2: Failure of Success Criterion 1.3.1 due to using changes in text presentation to convey information without using the appropriate markup or text.
- There may be some HTML pages that don’t have a valid title element in the head section that defines in a simple phrase the purpose of the document. This helps users to orient themselves within the site quickly without having to search for orientation information in the body of the page. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA H25: Providing a title using the title element, Success Criterion 2.4.2 (Page Titled)
- There may be some failure conditions where duplicate ID errors are known to cause problems for assistive technologies when they are trying to interact with content. Duplicate values of type ID can be problematic for user agents that rely on this attribute to accurately convey relationships between different parts of content to users. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA F17 - Failure of Success Criterion 1.3.1 and 4.1.1 due to insufficient information in DOM to determine one-to-one relationships (e.g., between labels with same id) in HTML.
- There may be pages with failure conditions for not text alternatives on images. If there is no alt attribute, then assistive technologies are not able to identify the image or to convey its purpose to the user. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA F65: Failure of Success Criterion 1.1.1 due to omitting the alt attribute on img elements, area elements, and input elements of type "image"
- There may be some failure conditions where the purpose of a link by providing descriptive text as the content of the element is unavailable. The description lets a user distinguish this link from other links in the Web page and helps the user determine whether to follow the link. The URI of the destination is generally not sufficiently descriptive. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA error H30: Providing link text that describes the purpose of a link for anchor elements
- Certain pages may have failures to identify examples of mark-up errors in element tags that could cause assistive technology to be unable to generate a satisfactory model of the page. Different user agents may implement different heuristics to recover from errors, resulting in inconsistent presentations of the page between user agents. This failure relates to WCAG 2.1 AA Success Criterion 4.1.1 (Parsing) F70: Failure of Success Criterion 4.1.1 due to incorrect use of start and end tags or attribute mark-up.
- Some pages or content may contain key errors that are known to cause problems for assistive technologies when they are trying to parse content which involve having opening and closing tags that are not used according to specification. This technique relates to WCAG 2.1 AA Success Criterion 4.1.1: Parsing H74: Ensuring that opening and closing tags are used according to specification.
- There may be some failures to ensure that the label for any interactive component within Web content makes the component's purpose clear. Using the appropriate technology-specific techniques for technologies for associating labels with interactive controls allows assistive technology to recognize the label and present it to the user, therefore allowing the user to identify the purpose of the control. The label may also be used to include text or a text symbol indicating that input is required. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA G131: Success Criterion 2.4.6 (Headings and Labels) and Success Criterion 3.3.2 (Labels or Instructions).
- There may be some failure conditions failing to allow for the technique to use HTML and XHTML according to their respective specifications. Technology specifications define the meaning and proper handling of features of the technology. Using those features in the manner described by the specification ensures that user agents, including assistive technologies, will be able to present representations of the feature that are accurate to the author's intent and interoperable with each other. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA error H88: Using HTML according to spec.
- Some pages or content may contain key errors that are known to cause problems for assistive technologies when they are trying to parse contents. Well-formedness is checked by parsing the document with a conforming XML parser and checking if the validation report mentions well-formedness errors. Every conforming XML parser is required to check well-formedness and stop normal processing when a well-formedness error is found (a conforming XML parser does not need to support validation). This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA success criterion H75: Ensuring that Web pages are well-formed.
- There may be some occurrences of mark-up languages not used in a way that fully conforms to their specifications, all of the requirements in 4.1.1 are met. Therefore, while fully conforming to specifications is not required to conform to WCAG 2.0, it is a best practice and is sufficient to meet Success Criterion 4.1.1. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA error G192: Fully conforming to specifications
- There may be some web pages that contain ambiguities that often result from code that does not validate against formal specifications. Each technology's mechanism to specify the technology and technology version is used, and the web page is validated against the formal specification of that technology. If a validator for that technology is available, the developer can use it. Validation will usually eliminate ambiguities (and more) because an essential step in validation is to check for proper use of that technology's markup (in a markup language) or code (in other technologies). Validation does not necessarily check for full conformance with a specification but it is the best means for automatically checking content against its specification. This technique relates to WCAG 2.1 AA Success Criterion 4.1.1: Parsing- relates to error code G134.
- There may be some web pages that contain failures to use HTML and XHTML heading markup to provide semantic code for headings in the content. Heading markup will allow assistive technologies to present the heading status of text to a user, this failure may prevent a screen reader from recognizing the code and announce the text in a more efficient way. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA H42: Using h1-h6 to identify headings, Success Criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships)
- There may be some web pages without a descriptive title. Descriptive titles help users find content, orient themselves within it, and navigate through it. A descriptive title allows a user to easily identify what Web page they are using and to tell when the Web page has changed. The title can be used to identify the Web page without requiring users to read or interpret page content. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA G88: Providing descriptive titles for Web pages, Success Criterion 2.4.2 (Page Titled)
- Some web pages may not provide a text alternative for content rendered using the object element. The body of the object element can be used to provide a complete text alternative for the object, or may contain additional non-text content with text alternatives. This fallback content will be presented to the user. If the media is rendered without the fallback content, the media needs to be directly accessible. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA success criterion code H53: Using the body of the object element.
- There may be some failure conditions where id attributes are not unique on a Web page and can cause errors that are known to cause problems for assistive technologies when they are trying to parse content that has the same id attribute on different elements. This issue relates to WCAG 2.1 AA H93: Ensuring that id attributes are unique on a Web page.
- There are some failures to demonstrate how CSS can be used to control the visual presentation of text. This will allow users to modify, via the user agent, the visual characteristics of the text to meet their requirement. The text characteristics include aspects such as size, colour, font family and relative placement. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA C22: Using CSS to control visual presentation of text.
- There may be some images that fail to specify a short text alternative with the alt attribute. Note. The value of this attribute is referred to as "alt text". When an image contains words that are important to understanding the content, the 'alt text' should include those words. This will allow the 'alt text' to play the same function on the page as the image. Note that it does not necessarily describe the visual characteristics of the image itself but must convey the same meaning as the image. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA H37: Using alt attributes on img elements Success Criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content)
- There may be failure conditions for text alternatives on images that should be ignored by 'alt text'. If there is no alt attribute at all, assistive technologies are not able to ignore the non-text content. The alt attribute should be provided in these cases. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA F38: Failure of Success Criterion 1.1.1 due to not marking up decorative images in HTML in a way that allows assistive technology to ignore them, Success Criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content)
- There may be failure in technique to show how images can be marked so that they can be ignored by Assistive Technology. If no title attribute is used, and the alt text is set to null it indicates to assistive technology that the image can be safely ignored.This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA H67: Using null alt text and no title attribute on img elements for images that AT should ignore, Success Criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content)
- There may be failure of technique to avoid unnecessary duplication that occurs when a grouping of adjacent non-text content is used to present information or functionality. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA G196: Using a text alternative on one item within a group of images that describes all items in the group, Success Criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content)
- There may be some web pages that show technique failures to allow users to identify the non-text content even if the non-text content is intended to provide a specific sensory experience. For example, a deaf person may want to know what an audio instrumental file is - even if they cannot hear it. Similarly, a blind person may want to know what the subject of a visual image is - even if they cannot see it. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA G100: Providing a short text alternative which is the accepted name or a descriptive name of the non-text content, Success Criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content).
- There may be some failures in technique to provide useful information via the text alternative even if the full function of the non-text content cannot be provided. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA G82: Providing a text alternative that identifies the purpose of the non-text content, Success Criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text Content)
- Some failure conditions may occur where techniques have failed to ensure that sections have headings that identify them. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA Success Criterion 1.3.1 which requires that the headings be marked such that they can be programmatically identified (error code G141).
- The objective of this technique is to illustrate the use of both keyboard-specific and mouse-specific events with code that has a scripting function associated with an event. Using both keyboard-specific and mouse-specific events together ensures that content can be operated by a wide range of devices. For example, a script may perform the same action when a key press is detected that is performed when a mouse button is clicked. This technique goes beyond the Success Criterion requirement for keyboard access by including not only keyboard access but access using other devices as well. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA code SCR20: Using both keyboard and other device-specific functions, Success Criterion 2.1.1 (Keyboard)
- There may be some PDF documents that don’t show how a descriptive title for a PDF document can be specified for assistive technology by using the 'Title' entry in the document information dictionary and by setting the 'DisplayDocTitle' flag to True in a viewer preferences dictionary. This is typically accomplished by using a tool for authoring PDF. This relates to WCAG 2.1 AA code PDF18: Specifying the document title using the Title entry in the document information dictionary of a PDF document.
Please be aware that a program of work is currently underway to address accessibility issues, involving internal developers and designers, and Learning Pool, who provides our Learning Management System.
We aim to resolve all the accessibility issues mentioned above by 31 December 2021.
Online services which are exempt from accessibility standards
Parts of our online services are exempt from accessibility standard 'WCAG 2.1 AA'.
The accessibility regulations do not require us to 'fix' downloads if they were published before 23 September 2018 (if they’re not essential to providing services).
We do not plan to add captions to pre-recorded (audio and) videos published before 23 September 2020, because these are exempt from meeting the accessibility regulations.
Where our assessments have determined it would be a disproportionate burden to apply fixes to make a particular online service accessible, you can email: email@example.com to request information in an accessible format. We'll detail the requirements that we're unable to comply with, due to disproportionate burden, by 31 July 2021.
Ongoing improvements for increased accessibility
Our online services are currently being (and will continue to be) reviewed for compliance with WCAG 2.1 AA; these tests are carried out internally using manual checks alongside automated testing using SiteMorse. The findings of our ongoing SiteMorse reviews will continue to inform and prioritise our actions according to usage data, as we work to improve accessibility across our online services.
Our current estimate is that all accessibility fixes will be undertaken no later than 31 December 2021.
This accessibility statement was last reviewed on 19 April 2021, by our WDU Facilitators Team.