Web accessibility remains one of the most overlooked aspects of modern web development, despite its critical importance for creating inclusive digital experiences. While many developers and designers have good intentions when it comes to accessibility, common mistakes continue to create barriers for users with disabilities. Understanding these frequent pitfalls and learning how to avoid them is essential for building websites that truly serve all users.
Missing or Inadequate Alternative Text
One of the most prevalent accessibility mistakes involves images without proper alternative text or alt attributes that don’t serve their intended purpose. Many websites either completely omit alt text, use generic descriptions like “image” or “photo,” or provide unhelpful descriptions that don’t convey the image’s meaning or function.
The problem extends beyond simply forgetting to add alt text. Developers often misunderstand what makes effective alternative text. Alt text should describe the purpose or content of an image within its context, not just what the image looks like. For a chart showing quarterly sales data, “bar chart” isn’t helpful, but “quarterly sales increased 15% from Q1 to Q4” provides meaningful information.
To avoid this mistake, establish clear guidelines for alt text creation. Informative images need descriptive alt text that conveys the same information to screen reader users. Decorative images that don’t add meaningful content should use empty alt attributes (alt="") so assistive technologies skip them. For complex images like infographics or detailed charts, consider providing longer descriptions in the surrounding text or through expandable content sections.
Poor Color Contrast and Color-Only Information
Color contrast issues rank among the most common accessibility violations. Many websites use color combinations that don’t meet minimum contrast requirements, making text difficult or impossible to read for users with visual impairments. This problem often occurs with light gray text on white backgrounds, thin fonts, or when attempting to create subtle design aesthetics at the expense of readability.
Equally problematic is using color as the sole method of conveying information. Error messages that only turn text red, required form fields indicated only by color changes, or interactive elements that rely exclusively on color states create barriers for users with color blindness or those using monochrome displays.
Prevent these issues by testing color contrast ratios during the design phase. Normal text should have at least a 4.5:1 contrast ratio against its background, while large text needs at least 3:1. Use tools like WebAIM’s contrast checker or built-in browser developer tools to verify your color combinations. When using color to convey information, always provide additional indicators like icons, text labels, underlines for links, or different styling patterns.
Keyboard Navigation Failures
Many websites work perfectly with a mouse but become completely unusable when navigating with only a keyboard. This affects not just users who can’t use a mouse due to motor disabilities, but also power users who prefer keyboard navigation for efficiency. Common keyboard navigation problems include missing focus indicators, illogical tab order, keyboard traps, and interactive elements that can’t be reached via keyboard at all.
Focus indicators deserve special attention because they’re often removed for aesthetic reasons without providing adequate replacements. When developers use outline: none in CSS without implementing alternative focus styles, keyboard users lose track of their position on the page.
Ensure comprehensive keyboard accessibility by testing your entire site using only the Tab, Shift+Tab, Enter, and arrow keys. Every interactive element should be reachable and usable via keyboard. Implement clear, visible focus indicators that stand out against all background colors. Maintain logical tab order that follows the visual flow of content. Avoid keyboard traps where users get stuck in dropdown menus, modal dialogs, or other interface components without a clear way to move forward or backward.
Form Accessibility Oversights
Forms represent critical interaction points on most websites, yet they’re frequently inaccessible due to missing labels, unclear error handling, or poor structure. Unlabeled form fields leave screen reader users guessing about what information to enter. Generic error messages like “invalid input” don’t help users understand how to fix problems. Required fields indicated only by color or asterisks without text create confusion.
Form accessibility problems often stem from visual design decisions that work for sighted users but fail to provide equivalent information to assistive technologies. Placeholder text used instead of proper labels disappears when users start typing and isn’t reliably announced by screen readers. Grouping related fields without proper markup makes complex forms difficult to navigate and understand.
Create accessible forms by providing clear, descriptive labels for every input field. Use the <label> element or aria-labelledby attribute to create programmatic associations between labels and form controls. Clearly indicate required fields using text, not just visual cues. When validation errors occur, provide specific, actionable error messages positioned near the relevant fields. Use <fieldset> and <legend> elements to group related form fields and provide context. Ensure error messages are announced to screen readers using appropriate ARIA attributes.
Inadequate Heading Structure
Poor heading structure represents a fundamental accessibility problem that affects how users navigate and understand content. Many websites use headings based on visual appearance rather than content hierarchy, skip heading levels, or use multiple H1 elements on a single page. Some sites avoid proper heading elements entirely, using styled paragraphs or divs that look like headings but don’t provide semantic structure.
Screen reader users rely heavily on heading navigation to understand page structure and jump between sections efficiently. When heading structure is broken or inconsistent, this navigation method becomes ineffective, forcing users to listen to entire pages linearly.
Implement proper heading hierarchy by using H1 for the main page title, H2 for major sections, H3 for subsections, and so on. Don’t skip heading levels—an H4 should only appear within an H3 section. Use only one H1 per page to clearly identify the primary content. Make sure headings accurately describe the content that follows them. When you need text to look like a heading for visual design purposes but it’s not actually a heading structurally, use CSS styling on regular text rather than heading elements.
Link and Button Confusion
Many websites blur the line between links and buttons, using them incorrectly and confusing both users and assistive technologies. Links should navigate to different pages or locations, while buttons should trigger actions like submitting forms, opening modals, or expanding content. When these purposes are mixed up, users can’t predict what will happen when they interact with elements.
Generic link text creates another significant problem. Links with text like “click here,” “read more,” or “learn more” don’t provide meaningful information when taken out of context. Screen reader users often navigate by jumping between links, so each link should make sense independently.
Use links for navigation and buttons for actions. When styling buttons to look like links or vice versa, ensure the HTML element matches the function, not just the appearance. Write descriptive link text that clearly indicates the destination or purpose. If you must use generic link text, provide additional context using aria-label or aria-describedby attributes. Ensure all interactive elements have accessible names that clearly describe their purpose.
Modal Dialog and Popup Accessibility Issues
Modal dialogs and popups frequently create accessibility barriers due to poor focus management, missing keyboard support, or inadequate markup. When modals open, focus often remains on the background page, leaving keyboard users unable to interact with the modal content. Many modals can’t be closed using the Escape key, lack proper headings, or don’t properly communicate their purpose to assistive technologies.
Implement accessible modals by moving focus to the modal when it opens, typically to the first interactive element or the modal’s heading. Trap focus within the modal so users can’t accidentally navigate to background content. Provide multiple ways to close the modal, including an obvious close button and Escape key support. Use appropriate ARIA attributes like role="dialog" and aria-labelledby to identify the modal’s purpose. When the modal closes, return focus to the element that triggered it.
Automated Accessibility Testing Limitations
Many teams rely exclusively on automated accessibility testing tools, assuming they catch all accessibility problems. While these tools are valuable for identifying certain types of issues, they typically detect only 20-30% of accessibility problems. Automated tools excel at finding missing alt text, color contrast violations, and basic markup issues, but they can’t evaluate the quality of alt text, assess whether interactions make sense, or determine if the overall user experience is accessible.
Combine automated testing with manual testing and user feedback. Use automated tools like axe-core, WAVE, or Lighthouse to catch obvious issues during development. Supplement this with manual keyboard testing, screen reader testing, and real user feedback from people with disabilities. Establish testing protocols that include both automated and manual components. Consider accessibility testing as an ongoing process rather than a one-time check.
Building Better Processes
Most accessibility mistakes stem from treating accessibility as an afterthought rather than integrating it into design and development processes. When accessibility considerations are added at the end of projects, fixing issues becomes more expensive and time-consuming. Teams often lack the knowledge and tools needed to identify and address accessibility problems effectively.
Create accessibility-first processes by including accessibility requirements in design specifications and development standards. Train team members on accessibility principles and provide resources for ongoing learning. Establish accessibility review checkpoints throughout your development process. Build accessibility testing into your quality assurance procedures. Document accessibility decisions and maintain style guides that include accessible patterns and components.
Moving Forward with Purpose
Avoiding these common accessibility mistakes requires commitment, education, and systematic change in how we approach web development. The goal isn’t perfection from day one, but rather building awareness and establishing processes that prevent these issues from occurring repeatedly. Each mistake avoided makes your website more usable for people with disabilities and often improves the experience for all users.
Start by auditing your current websites for these common issues. Prioritize fixes based on impact and feasibility, but don’t let the scope of needed improvements discourage action. Every small improvement matters, and building accessibility expertise is an ongoing journey that benefits from consistent effort over time. Remember that accessibility is ultimately about respect for your users and recognition that inclusive design creates better experiences for everyone.
At 7Shades Digital, we specialised in creating strategies that help businesses excel in the digital world. If you’re ready to take your website to the next level, contact us today!
