Accessibility Suite · Digital accessibility · WCAG 2.1 AA and EN 301 549
Two products and two services for digital accessibility: continuous checking with Incluvia, visual context for screen readers, CMS-agnostic analysis, and an audit reported against WCAG 2.1 AA and EN 301 549.
Who it is for
Digital accessibility is a process, not a plugin: check, prioritise, fix, evidence. The CodeXaureus Accessibility Suite covers that path with two products and two services, usable separately or together. We work independently of the CMS, test against WCAG 2.1 AA and EN 301 549, and state plainly what a tool resolves automatically and what remains an editorial or design decision.
The Accessibility Suite supports website owners, ecommerce, content, and development teams in finding testable barriers repeatedly, prioritising fixes, and organising responsibilities.
No tool makes a website compliant on its own. Only part of the requirements can be checked automatically; comprehensibility, interaction logic and editorial quality remain the operator's responsibility. That is why we combine software with analysis and an audit rather than selling a plugin as the answer.
WCAG 2.1 AA and EN 301 549 are the test basis, placed in the context of the European Accessibility Act and its German implementation. Testing starts from the delivered HTML, the templates and the recurring components, so it works whatever CMS or shop system sits behind them.
The situation
New content, components, and releases can introduce new barriers.
Long findings lists show problems but not the best working sequence for the team.
Engineering, editorial, and design teams need different guidance and one shared status.
In operation
Recurring scans expose technically testable barriers after changes.
Structure findings by impact and accountable team.
Assisted suggestions help with suitable jobs such as alt text while preserving contextual review.
Status and changes support a traceable internal process.
Scope
Specific enough for a sound decision and bounded enough for dependable delivery.
Our accessibility software checks pages repeatedly, prioritises technical barriers by location, and supports alt text, ARIA, contrast and language attributes. Where a problem is technically checkable, it proposes a correction or applies one.
An AI tool that goes past alt text: it describes infographics, charts and dashboards for blind users as a statement rather than an object, and answers follow-up questions about the same image in conversation. That opens up content a single line of alt text cannot carry. In development; talk to us about pilot projects.
We take apart structure, templates and recurring components, whatever CMS or shop system sits behind them. The result is not a list of findings but an answer to which building blocks create the barriers, and where one correction repairs many pages at once.
A pass against WCAG 2.1 AA and EN 301 549, alongside page performance, written up. The report names the gaps, orders them by effort and impact, and is structured to serve both as internal evidence and as a plan of work.
Incluvia in use
How it runs
Define technical scope, pages, and owners.
Capture testable barriers and order them by impact.
Route work to engineering, design, and editorial teams and review it.
Retest new releases and maintain a visible status.
06
CodeXaureus combines product configuration, system integration, and ongoing quality control. Scope is assessed against data, interfaces, privacy, and operational ownership before a pilot.
Common questions
No. No tool replaces an individual legal and professional review of all content and processes. Only part of the requirements can be checked automatically; comprehensibility, interaction logic and editorial quality remain the operator's responsibility. That is why we combine software with analysis and an audit rather than selling a plugin as the answer.
WCAG 2.1 AA and EN 301 549, with the results placed in the context of the European Accessibility Act and its German implementation. Whether those apply to a specific offering is a legal question we clarify with you rather than answer generically.
Alt text is one sentence. An infographic, a chart or a dashboard carries a statement, often several, and which one matters depends on the reader's question. Visual Context therefore describes the content as a statement and allows follow-up questions about the same image, instead of emitting one fixed line.
The analysis is system-independent and starts from the delivered HTML, the templates and the recurring components. That works for common CMS and shop platforms as well as for custom applications.
The accessibility and performance gaps found, each with its location, the component affected, a rating by effort and impact, and a concrete proposal for fixing it. The report is written as a plan of work, not as tool output.
Incluvia proposes alt text for suitable images. Meaningful content should be reviewed editorially so that purpose and context are described correctly. Automatically generated alt text that describes the picture rather than its function does not meet the requirement in practice.
No. Analysis and audit work without the software, and Incluvia can be integrated without a prior audit. In practice, analysis then audit then continuous checking is the most economical order, because the first two steps point the work at the components that affect many pages at once.
For the analysis and the audit the timeframe depends on scope and system access; we commit to it before starting rather than quoting a range. Incluvia delivers a baseline scan once integrated, which is what the prioritisation is built on.
Assess the accessibility workflow
We clarify scope, technical requirements, and a realistic continuous workflow.
