Accessibility
What was measured, what came out and what's still missing.
This website has been audited page by page —all 418 of them— against the WCAG 2.2 level AA criteria. Here are the results, including what could not be checked.
Why this page doesn't say "we are committed".
Almost every accessibility statement says the same three things: that the organisation is committed to guaranteeing universal access, that it is working to improve, and that if you have a problem you should report it. Not one of the three can be checked.
This one says what was measured, on how many pages, what came out and what is left to do. If anything here isn't met, you can point at it — which is exactly what makes a statement worth something.
What was checked, and how.
With the browser, going through all 418 published pages and measuring on each one.
Not with a tool that checks the home page and extrapolates: page by page, on the HTML the site really serves. And contrast measured against the background each piece of text actually has behind it on screen, which is not always the one it ought to have.
What came out.
- Language declared on every page. Without this, a screen reader reads Spanish with English phonetics and none of it makes sense. 418 out of 418.
- A single level-one heading per page, and not one of them empty. 418 out of 418.
- No skipped heading levels. There was one —from h1 to h3 on the IRIS Neural page, because a section had no heading— and it was corrected as soon as it was found.
- Every image with alternative text: 0 without it. The decorative ones carry it empty on purpose, which is the correct thing — a screen reader should skip them, not describe them.
- Not one link or button without an accessible name. An icon with no name is announced as "link" and does not say where it goes.
- A main region and a skip-to-content link on every page: anyone navigating with a keyboard does not have to go through the whole menu on each page.
- A page title on every one, and a different one on each: it is the first thing announced on arrival.
- Contrast measured text by text: none below the AA minimum. The colours of the four brands were chosen by measuring against the four backgrounds of the site, and that is why the Infinity blue used for reading is not exactly the one in the logo: the brand colour comes out at 4.27 against two of the four and does not pass.
- Visible focus: two solid pixels, set off from the element, on everything that can be focused. Without that, anyone navigating with a keyboard does not know where they are.
- Motion respects `prefers-reduced-motion`: if your system asks for less animation, it is switched off.
What has NOT been done.
And it is the most important part of this page, because nobody writes it.
It has not been tested with real users, nor with screen readers in real use. An automated audit finds what can be counted: a missing attribute, a contrast that falls short, a heading that skips a level. It does not find whether the reading order of a page makes sense when you listen to it, nor whether a table can be understood without seeing it, nor whether an explanation is comprehensible. Only the person using it can tell you that.
Full conformance with WCAG 2.2 AA is not declared. The criteria that could be measured are met, and they are above. There are criteria that call for human judgement and cannot be ticked from a script, and we are not going to tick them.
Part of the content is inherited from the previous site and is being rewritten. The old texts meet the structural criteria —headings, contrast, alternatives— but some are still harder to read than they should be, and that is accessibility too.
And the videos we link to are hosted on YouTube. Their subtitles and their player are not under our control.
How this website is built.
With HTML that means what it says: a heading is a heading, a list is a list, and a button that doesn't navigate is a button and not a link in disguise. That isn't a technical preference — it is what lets a screen reader announce the structure instead of reading out a soup of boxes.
You can go through the whole of it with the keyboard, with no focus traps. Text size can be increased from the browser without the page breaking, and the design responds to the system's light or dark theme.
And colour is never the only way of saying something. Each product family has its colour, but also its name in writing: if you can't tell orange from gold, the page still tells you which is which.
If something doesn't work, tell us.
And this isn't the polite line at the end: it is the useful part.
If you come across something you can't use —a page your screen reader doesn't order properly, a form you can't complete, a text you can't read— write to us and tell us what happened and what you were using it with. With that it can be reproduced and fixed; without it, it can't.
We reply, and if the problem is real it gets corrected and we say when. There is no committed deadline, because we are not going to commit to one we don't know we can meet, but there is an answer.
Technical details.
Reference standard: WCAG 2.2, level AA. Scope: the 418 published pages of upongroup.com. Method: automated review page by page on the served HTML, plus contrast and touch-target measurement on representative pages. Last review: September 2026.
This statement is updated when the site changes or when something in it is corrected. If the date above is old, so is the statement.
Get started
Have you come across something?
Tell us what you can't use and what you were trying to use it with. It's the only way it gets fixed.