Accessibility benchmark
NIYAMA-VIDYĀ uses WCAG 2.2 as the principal accessibility reference. Where practical, design and QA work should aim toward Level A and AA success criteria. Because WCAG conformance applies to complete pages and processes and requires testable success criteria to be satisfied, NIYAMA-VIDYĀ does not currently publish a blanket Level A or AA conformance claim.
Current accessibility practices
Semantic reading order
Headings, landmarks, labels and page hierarchy are used to make long-form learning pages easier to navigate.
Keyboard & focus
Navigation menus, account controls, buttons and dialogs are intended to work without requiring a pointer.
Contrast & legibility
Text, controls and progress or completion indicators are reviewed for readable contrast and clear hierarchy.
Reflow
Layouts and navigation are designed to adapt to narrower screens without requiring a separate mobile site.
Third-party boundaries
Authentication can transfer you to Google, GitHub or LinkedIn, and external references can open third-party sites. NIYAMA-VIDYĀ does not control the accessibility implementation of those external services or documents.
Known limitations & ongoing review
Long and technical content: chapters can contain dense explanations, code and extended reading sequences. Headings and navigation help, but cognitive load and reading effort can still be substantial.
Technical notation and diagrams: current formula and educational-figure patterns use textual explanations or captions intended to convey essential meaning. Dense technical material still benefits from periodic review, and this does not imply that every page has completed comprehensive assistive-technology testing.
Compatibility evidence: NIYAMA-VIDYĀ has not yet published a comprehensive browser, screen-reader, voice-control, magnification or user-testing matrix. External authentication and linked documents also remain outside NIYAMA-VIDYĀ's direct control.
If a diagram, formula, table, control, focus state, reading order, contrast choice or interaction creates a barrier, report the exact page, device or assistive technology where relevant, and what prevented access. An alternative format or explanation can then be considered for the specific material.
Report an accessibility barrier
Describe the exact barrier, the affected page or control, and the device or assistive technology involved when relevant. Clear context makes the issue easier to reproduce and address.
Review & ongoing priorities
Review date: September 11, 2026. Current accessibility checks cover headings and landmarks, tables and captions, educational figures and text alternatives, formulas, code explanations, link text, labelled controls, and keyboard/focus patterns.
The review did not include an external WCAG audit, a complete manual success-criterion evaluation, a published assistive-technology compatibility matrix or usability testing by people with disabilities. Those limitations are why this statement uses benchmark language rather than claiming conformance.
Ongoing priorities are to expand representative keyboard and screen-reader testing, strengthen compatibility evidence across assistive-technology contexts, continue periodic review of dense technical content, and treat reported access blockers as higher priority than cosmetic refinements. This statement should be reviewed after major interaction changes and when recurring barriers reveal a wider pattern.