Accessibility

Last reviewed: 29 August 2026

What this covers

The Slayt platform at slayt-ai.com, including the signed-in application. It does not cover third-party services embedded within it — Clerk for sign-in and Stripe for payment — which publish their own accessibility statements.

The standard we work to

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2, level AA.

Our current status — we do not claim a conformance level

We have not completed a formal accessibility audit, and we have not tested the platform with screen readers or other assistive technology. We are therefore not claiming conformance, full or partial. What follows is what we have actually checked and what we already know is wrong.

We would rather say this plainly than choose a favourable label. Many of our customers are public sector bodies with their own duties under the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018, and they may rely on a supplier's claim inside their own published statement. An untested claim is worse to them than an honest list of gaps.

What we have verified

• Tab navigation in project Settings and in the admin console is operable by keyboard. These were previously plain non-interactive elements that could not be reached by keyboard at all; they are now buttons carrying aria-current, confirmed in the browser accessibility tree on 29 August 2026.
• Every image on the platform carries alternative text.
• The page language is declared, so screen readers select the correct pronunciation rules.
• We ran an automated axe-core test (version 4.11.1, WCAG 2.0, 2.1 and 2.2 A and AA rules) on 29 August 2026 against the home page, pricing, advisory, this page, the signed-in dashboard, and a project workspace view. Its remaining findings are in the list below.
• Every drop-down menu and button the test found without an accessible name has been given one, and the fix confirmed by re-running the test. This included the three drop-downs on the advisory enquiry form — a public form that someone using a screen reader could not previously have completed — the organisation switcher and project filter on the dashboard, and the monthly/annual price toggle, which now reports its on or off state rather than only showing it.

What that automated test does and does not cover. A tool of this kind can check roughly a third of the WCAG success criteria — things a machine can measure, such as colour contrast ratios, missing alternative text, form controls without labels, and misuse of ARIA. It cannot tell whether a page makes sense read aloud, whether every function can be reached by keyboard, whether focus order is logical, or whether content still works at 400% zoom. Beyond the items listed below it reported no further violations of the rules it is able to check. That is a narrower statement than “no further problems”, and we mean the narrower one.

Known limitations

These are measured rather than estimated, and we would rather publish the specifics than a summary.

1. Some controls cannot be reached by keyboard. 59 clickable elements across the platform have no keyboard-accessible equivalent, so a keyboard or screen reader user cannot operate them. Known examples include the document-type chooser, the project update stepper, presentation slide navigation, and the filter controls on Milestones and Decisions. A further 35 elements wrap controls that are reachable, where only the surrounding click shortcut is unavailable.
2. Text contrast — largely remediated on 29 August 2026, with one known exception. Secondary text, body text, the brand teal used as text on light backgrounds, white text on our dark navy, and the status colours were all below the 4.5:1 minimum, measured between 1.85:1 and 4.31:1. All have been darkened — or, on the navy, lightened — to pass. The exception is the “AI” in our own wordmark, which is 2.07:1 on white and which we have left alone: WCAG 1.4.3 exempts text forming part of a logotype. It is the only contrast failure an automated test still reports on our public pages, and we would rather name it than have you wonder why it is there.
3. Some controls are smaller than the minimum target size. Two controls in the project workspace fall below the 24 by 24 pixel minimum introduced in WCAG 2.2, which makes them hard to hit accurately with a finger or an imprecise pointer.
4. Presentation mode slide controls have no accessible name. They are unlabelled, so a screen reader cannot announce what they do.
5. Untested, and therefore unknown: screen reader compatibility, keyboard navigation end to end, zoom and reflow to 400%, focus visibility throughout, form error identification and suggestion, and reduced-motion preferences. None of these is covered by the automated test above, and we are not going to guess at them.

What we are doing about it

Each limitation above is tracked as work, and we are fixing keyboard access control by control rather than in one sweep — the Settings and admin navigation described above were the first.

The contrast work was done in four separate passes rather than one find-and-replace, because the failures were not one problem. Greys on light backgrounds needed darkening; white text on our dark navy needed the opposite; the brand teal is correct on the navy at 8.4:1 and only fails on light grounds, so it changed in a handful of places rather than everywhere; and the status colours carry meaning, so each was darkened to the least amount that passes rather than replaced. Roughly a thousand declarations changed. Background, border and chart-fill uses of the same colours were deliberately not touched, because those are not text and are governed by a different rule.

We are not publishing target dates we have not planned to. If you need a timeline for a procurement or an assessment, ask and we will tell you our actual position rather than a date chosen to sound reassuring.

Feedback and how to reach us

If you find an accessibility barrier, email hello@slayt-ai.com. Tell us the page you were on and what happened. We aim to respond within 5 working days.

If you need information held in the platform in a different format — a document, a report, or an export — ask us at the same address and we will provide it.

For public sector customers

We can supply this information in the form you need for your own accessibility statement, a procurement response, or a supplier assessment. We would rather give you a short accurate list of what does not yet work than a conformance claim we have not earned. Email hello@slayt-ai.com.