Accessibility overlay
alternatives
Looking for alternatives to widget-based accessibility tools? Understand how different approaches compare and find the right solution for your WCAG compliance needs.
Widget-based tools vs code audits
Two fundamentally different approaches to web accessibility. Understanding the differences helps you make informed decisions.
Widget-Based Tools
JavaScript overlays that modify your site at runtime
How they work
A JavaScript snippet is added to your site. When visitors load your page, the script attempts to detect and "fix" accessibility issues in real-time by modifying the DOM.
Considerations
- Don't modify your actual source code
- May conflict with assistive technology settings
- Issues return if script fails to load
- Concerns raised by accessibility community
Code-Level Assessment
Scan your site and get guidance to fix issues in your source code
How they work
External tools scan your website, identify WCAG violations, and provide specific guidance with code examples so your team can fix issues in your HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.
Benefits
- Guides you to make permanent source code fixes
- Your fixes work with all assistive technologies
- No external dependencies at runtime
- Aligned with DOJ web accessibility guidance
Side-by-side comparison
How different accessibility approaches compare across key factors.
Automated vs manual testing
Understanding what automated tools can and cannot detect is essential for comprehensive accessibility.
Automated Testing
Automated tools like axe-core can detect many common accessibility issues quickly and consistently. According to W3C WAI guidance, these tools are valuable but have inherent limitations.
What automation can detect:
- Missing alt attributes on images
- Missing form labels
- Insufficient color contrast
- Missing document language
- Duplicate IDs
- Invalid ARIA attributes
Manual Testing
Many WCAG success criteria require human judgment. The WCAG 2.2 Quick Reference includes criteria that cannot be evaluated programmatically.
What requires human review:
- Whether alt text is meaningful and accurate
- If content is logically organized
- Whether error messages are helpful
- If focus order is intuitive
- Whether captions are synchronized correctly
- If interactive elements are predictable
We're honest about this limitation
inclly's automated scans detect approximately 30-40% of WCAG issues—in line with industry research on automated testing capabilities. Our reports clearly indicate what was tested automatically and what your team should review manually.
Trusted sources
We base our approach on guidance from recognized accessibility authorities and research organizations.
W3C WAI Evaluation Tools
Official W3C guidance on what automated accessibility testing tools can and cannot do.
World Wide Web Consortium
WebAIM Million Study
Annual analysis of the top 1 million home pages, finding 94.8% have detectable WCAG failures.
WebAIM (Web Accessibility In Mind)
Overlay Fact Sheet
Joint statement from accessibility professionals and disability advocates about overlay limitations.
Accessibility Community
DOJ Web Accessibility Guidance
U.S. Department of Justice guidance on web accessibility requirements under the ADA.
U.S. Department of Justice
WCAG 2.2 Specification
The current W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, the industry standard for web accessibility.
World Wide Web Consortium
European Accessibility Act
EU directive requiring digital products and services to be accessible by June 2025.
European Commission
Why choose inclly?
We provide comprehensive accessibility assessment—not runtime patches.
No code injection
We scan externally using real browsers (Playwright + axe-core). We never touch your site or inject JavaScript—we just assess and report.
Honest about limitations
Automated scans catch ~30-40% of issues. We clearly indicate what requires manual review by your team, aligned with W3C WAI guidance.
Actionable remediation guidance
Get framework-specific code examples for React, Vue, Angular, and vanilla HTML. Your developers know exactly what to fix and how.
Legal documentation
Timestamped audit reports for legal defense. Evidence of assessment and good-faith remediation efforts, as emphasized by DOJ guidance.
Assessment, not remediation
inclly identifies accessibility issues and provides detailed guidance with code examples. Your development team implements the fixes in your codebase—giving you full control over changes and ensuring they work with your specific tech stack.
Common questions
Understanding accessibility approaches and finding alternatives.
What's the difference between overlay widgets and code-level assessment?
Overlay widgets inject JavaScript that attempts to modify your site at runtime. Code-level assessment tools like inclly identify issues and provide guidance so your team can fix them in your actual source code. According to W3C WAI guidance, fixing underlying code issues creates permanent, reliable improvements.
Are there alternatives to accessibility overlay widgets?
Yes. Code-level accessibility assessment tools, manual testing with assistive technologies, and expert audits are all alternatives. These approaches help you understand your issues and guide your team to fix them in source code rather than relying on runtime patches.
Does inclly fix accessibility issues for me?
No. inclly is an assessment tool—we scan your site, identify WCAG violations, and provide detailed remediation guidance with code examples. Your development team implements the fixes, which means you have full control over changes and they work with your specific tech stack.
Can any automated tool achieve 100% WCAG compliance?
No. According to W3C WAI, automated tools can detect approximately 30-40% of accessibility issues. Many WCAG success criteria require human judgment—like whether alt text is meaningful or content is logically organized. This is why our reports clearly indicate what requires manual review.
What should I look for in an accessibility assessment tool?
Look for tools that: scan without injecting code, are transparent about automation limitations, provide specific remediation guidance with code examples, generate audit documentation, and clearly indicate what requires manual testing by your team.
How is inclly different from other accessibility scanners?
inclly uses Playwright and axe-core to scan your site externally, provides framework-specific code examples for remediation, generates timestamped audit documentation, and is transparent about what automation can and cannot detect. We focus on actionable guidance your team can implement.
Do I still need manual testing if I use inclly?
Yes. The W3C WAI explicitly states that automated tools cannot fully evaluate many WCAG criteria. Our reports identify issues we can detect automatically and clearly indicate what your team should review manually with screen readers and keyboard navigation.
Ready for honest assessment?
See what's actually wrong with your site. Get actionable guidance your team can implement, with full source citations.