Accessibility statement

Conformance target

This site is designed to meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) version 2.2 at Level AA, with Level AAA targeted where reasonable for body and large text contrast. Layout follows POUR principles — perceivable, operable, understandable, robust.

What was attended to

Heading hierarchy is preserved end to end. Semantic landmarks are used in place of generic containers — header, nav, main, and footer. Interactive controls carry visible focus indicators with an offset large enough to read against any background.

All informative images include a text alternative. Decorative ornaments — the soft circles in the hero, the subtle stripes on placeholder cards — are marked with aria-hidden so a screen reader is not asked to describe them. Form fields carry visible labels, helpful hints, and inline error messages announced through a polite live region.

Touch targets meet a minimum of 44 by 44 pixels. The site honours prefers-reduced-motion by suppressing transitions and reveal animations for visitors who request it. Colour is never the only carrier of meaning.

Tested with

The site has been reviewed manually using keyboard navigation and screen readers, supplemented by automated tooling. Methods include a custom WCAG 2.2 checklist informed by the WebAIM Million study, Axe DevTools, Lighthouse, WAVE, and a colour-contrast analyzer. Findings are addressed before publication of each page.

Known limitations

A few items remain in active improvement. The portrait and case study images currently appear as placeholders pending uploaded photography. The contact form will deliver messages once a Formspree key is configured; until then, a clear status message is shown and an email alternative is offered. [update as items are resolved]

Reporting a barrier

If you encounter a barrier on this site, please write to tanisa.imoto@gmail.com with a short description of what happened, the page you were on, and the assistive technology in use. A reply usually arrives within a few working days. Reported barriers are taken as a meaningful contribution to the work, not a complaint.

Continuous improvement

Accessibility is approached as continuous practice rather than a one-time check. Each new page is reviewed against the same checklist used for client work, and the statement above is revised as the site evolves.