Accessibility statement

Where this site stands

Partially conformant with WCAG 2.1 level AA. "Partially" is the accurate word: the criteria listed below have been checked in the code, several others have not been evaluated, and two known barriers remain.

No third-party audit has been carried out, and no testing has been done with people who use assistive technology daily. A statement based only on the author’s own checks is worth less than one based on both, and saying so is part of the statement.

What has been verified

Each of these was checked against the source code rather than assumed. Where a contrast ratio is given, it was calculated and is recorded in the site stylesheet next to the colour it justifies.

• The site reads completely without JavaScript. Articles, hubs, tables, diagrams, sources and navigation are all static HTML — nothing essential waits on a script.
• A skip link to the main content is the first focusable element on every page.
• Keyboard focus is always visible: a single site-wide rule draws a two-pixel outline with an offset, so it stays visible on buttons of the same colour as the outline.
• Interactive targets are at least 44 by 44 pixels, applied consistently across the site rather than case by case.
• Text contrast is calculated, not eyeballed. Muted text reaches about 8.5:1 on the page background; the accent used on the dark steel background reaches 5.79:1; input borders reach 3.20:1 on paper and 3.00:1 on panels, which is the 3:1 that criterion 1.4.11 requires for the boundary of a control and which the previous border colour missed at 1.28:1.
• Animation and smooth scrolling are switched off for anyone whose system requests reduced motion.
• Every page declares its language, and every figure carries alternative text describing what it shows. This is enforced at build time rather than left to discipline: the content validator rejects an article whose alternative text merely repeats the target keyword instead of describing the image, and rejects a figure whose file is missing.
• Wide tables scroll inside a container that is reachable and scrollable by keyboard, and is announced as a region with a name.
• Every table header cell declares what it heads. Tables written by hand carry that declaration in their markup; tables written in Markdown, which produced bare header cells until 2026-08-28, now receive it during rendering — so the next Markdown table is covered without anyone having to remember.
• Form fields have visible labels, correct autocomplete values, and error and help text tied to the field they belong to.
• There is no captcha. Automated submissions are blocked by a hidden honeypot field instead — captchas are among the most reliable ways to lock a disabled user out of a form.

Known barriers

Two functions require JavaScript, and one area has not been evaluated at all. Neither is hidden from the reader.

• Search will not work without JavaScript. The index runs in your browser — nothing is sent to a server — and that design choice is what makes the script mandatory. Everything published remains reachable by navigation: the footer lists every section, and each section page lists its articles.
• The calculators need JavaScript for the arithmetic. Without it, each one now explains that only the calculation is missing: the fields still show which inputs the calculation takes, and the method, constants and assumptions below the form remain readable as text.
• No structured evaluation has been done on reading order in complex diagrams, nor on the experience of a screen magnifier at 400 percent zoom.

Reporting a barrier

If something on this site is unusable for you, please say so through the contact form. Describing what you were trying to do, on which page, and with which browser or assistive technology is enough — no technical vocabulary is needed.

Accessibility reports are treated like error reports: they are acted on, and a substantive fix is logged publicly in the corrections log with its date.

If a page is unreachable for you and you need its content another way, ask through the same form and it will be sent in a form you can read.

Scope and method

This statement covers maintenanceblueprint.com in its entirety, including the calculators.

It is based on a self-evaluation carried out on the source code and on a real build of the site, not on an automated score. Automated tools were used to catch what they catch well — contrast, missing labels, alternative text — and their results were checked by hand, because the criteria that matter most here are the ones no tool can judge.

It is dated. If the site changes in a way that affects any statement above, this page changes with it, and its date moves.