Designed to meet WCAG 2.2 Level AA.Here is what we have actually checked.

Each of these was checked against this site's own code and design system rather than assumed:

• Colour contrast, computed. Every colour in the palette was measured against the page background. Body text at #91a5d4 reaches 7.3:1 on the page ground and 6.2:1 on the raised panels; headings in gold reach 10.7:1 and 9.1:1. The weakest pair used anywhere on the site is the fine-print blue at 4.60:1, which clears the AA threshold of 4.5:1 for normal text. That same colour is deliberately not used on the raised panels, where it would drop to 3.9:1 and fail.
• Keyboard focus is always visible. Every link, button, menu control and scrollable region carries an explicit focus ring. Nothing relies on the browser default, and nothing suppresses the outline.
• A skip link that works. The first focusable element on every page jumps past the header to the main content, and it becomes genuinely visible when focused rather than staying hidden.
• Landmark structure and labelling. Every page has a header, a single main region and a footer. Each navigation region has its own accessible name, so “navigation” is never announced three times with no way to tell them apart. The current page is marked as such in the navigation.
• One heading structure per page. Each page owns exactly one first-level heading, and every section heading is programmatically tied to the region it labels. The glossary renderer shifts author-written headings down one level for the same reason, so an entry cannot introduce a second first-level heading or skip a level.
• Colour is never the only signal. On the comparison pages the verdict in each row is a word, not a coloured swatch. Nothing on this site is distinguishable by hue alone.
• Wide tables scroll without trapping anyone. Comparison and glossary tables scroll inside their own container, so the page itself never scrolls sideways, and each scrollable region is focusable and named so it can be reached and operated from the keyboard rather than only by trackpad.
• Reduced motion is respected. Smooth scrolling is applied only when the operating system has not been asked to reduce motion.
• Decorative images are hidden. Images that carry no information are hidden from assistive technology so they are not announced, and the ones that do carry information have text alternatives.
• A real defect was found this way and fixed. At phone widths the brand link had no accessible name at all, because the only part of it carrying that name was hidden at small sizes. It passed every desktop check. It now carries an explicit label at every width.

This is the part most accessibility statements leave out. None of the following has been done, and we are not going to imply otherwise:

• No independent audit. No third party has assessed this site. Everything in the section above is our own testing.
• No screen-reader testing pass. The site has not been walked end to end with NVDA, JAWS, VoiceOver or TalkBack. The semantics are correct as written, but correct markup and a good screen-reader experience are not the same claim.
• Reflow has not been measured. We have not verified the site at 320 CSS pixels wide or at 400% zoom without loss of content or function.
• Target size has not been measured. The menu button and the main call to action were sized deliberately, but no systematic measurement of every interactive target has been carried out.
• Text spacing and other user-override behaviours are untested. We have not verified the layout under user stylesheets that change line height, letter spacing or word spacing.
• No testing with voice control, switch access or screen magnification.
• No published VPAT or Accessibility Conformance Report. If you need one for a procurement file, ask us and we will tell you honestly where we are rather than produce one to order.

This statement applies to learnsilas.vortex.llc and its pages. It does not cover other Vortex Computation websites, which are built on a different system and are not assessed here, and it does not cover the Silas™ product itself. That is separate software, and its accessibility is a separate question we are happy to answer directly.

Accessibility decisions are made in the code rather than retrofitted. The contrast figures above are recorded as comments next to the colour definitions, so a future change that breaks one is visible in review. The navigation has an automated check that fails if a specific keyboard-and-visibility defect ever returns.

That is a modest amount of machinery, and we are describing it accurately rather than calling it a programme.

If any part of this site is difficult or impossible for you to use, we want to know, and we will fix it. You do not need to identify the standard or the success criterion. Describing what happened is enough.

It helps if you can include:

• the address of the page;
• what you were trying to do, and what happened instead;
• the browser, device and any assistive technology you were using, if you know it.

Reach us at the details below, or through the contact form on vortex.llc. If you need any information on this site in a different format, ask and we will provide it.

This statement is reviewed whenever the site's design system or shared layout changes, and the date at the top is revised when it does. It will be rewritten, not merely re-dated, if an independent audit is carried out, because at that point the second section above should get considerably shorter.