Frame 1: Minimise usability risk
This is a spec: descriptive guidance, not a checkable rule. It carries no forbidden and instead pair, and no jig check detector applies to it directly.
The spec
Ask: who could struggle with this, and why?
Design decisions are risk decisions. Almost every appealing choice carries a risk that somebody finds it harder to use:
| The appealing thing | The risk |
|---|---|
| Thin, light-grey text | Unreadable with low vision, in sunlight, on a poor screen |
| Icons without labels | Meaning unavailable to anyone who does not know the glyph |
| Coloured heading text | Reads as a link; invites a click that does nothing |
| A subtle, borderless control | Not recognised as interactive |
| Placeholder instead of label | Disappears exactly when it is needed |
The risk is rarely to the median user. It falls on people with reduced vision, low computer literacy, limited dexterity or reduced cognitive capacity — and on ordinary users in bad conditions, which is most conditions. You will usually not know who is on the other side, so design for the widest range you can.
Use it like this: for any decision no rule covers, name who could struggle and why. If the answer is uncomfortable, take the safer option. If the risk is real and recurring, it is a new rule — add it to 00.
Floor: WCAG 2.1 level AA. Meeting AA is the starting point, not the achievement.
- Kind
- Spec
- Section
- Principles
- Group
- Frames