Accessibility
The Tradellen platform is operated by Tradellen LLC. We target WCAG 2.2 Level AA. This page states our conformance as partially conformant, lists what we measured and what we found, and — just as plainly — names what we have not tested. We do not claim more than we can show.
Our commitment
Tradellen is used by dispatchers, office managers, technicians and business owners, on desktops in an office and on phones in a truck. Some of them are blind or have low vision, some are colour-blind, some navigate entirely by keyboard, some use voice control, and some just need bigger text at the end of a long day. The product has to work for all of them, so accessibility is treated as a functional requirement here, not a compliance exercise.
Conformance status
Partially conformant with WCAG 2.2 Level AA. "Partially conformant" means most of the standard has been met and verified, but not all of it has been evaluated. The specific reason we do not claim full conformance is stated below under What we have not tested — principally that no screen reader has been driven end-to-end by a human, and no independent third party has audited us.
Standards this maps to
- WCAG 2.2 Level AA (W3C) — our stated target, and the basis of every measurement on this page.
- EN 301 549 — the European standard referenced by the European Accessibility Act. Its web requirements incorporate WCAG Level AA.
- Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title III — US courts have generally looked to WCAG AA as the practical yardstick for commercial websites and web applications.
- Section 508 (US federal procurement) — incorporates WCAG 2.0 Level AA by reference. WCAG 2.2 AA is a superset.
What we measured, and what we found
The figures below come from automated measurement across 16 surfaces — the marketing site, the legal pages and six screens of the signed-in application — at 390, 768 and 1280 CSS px in two rendering engines (Chromium and WebKit): 64 page×width×engine combinations per run. Reflow, text resizing and focus behaviour are measured separately, and include 320 px, the narrowest width WCAG requires support for.
| Check | Criterion | Before | Now |
|---|---|---|---|
| Text failing contrast on a solid background | 1.4.3 (AA) | 406 | 0 |
| Controls with no accessible name | 4.1.2 (A) | 0 | 0 |
| Images with no alt text | 1.1.1 (A) | 0 | 0 |
| Decorative icons exposed to screen readers | 1.1.1 (A) | 1,282 | 0 |
| Skipped heading levels | 1.3.1 (A) | 0 | 0 |
| Duplicate element IDs (break label association) | 1.3.1 (A) | 0 | 0 |
Pages with no <main> landmark | 1.3.1 (A) | 86 | 0 |
| Pages with no "skip to content" link | 2.4.1 (A) | 86 | 0 |
| Personal-data fields with no autocomplete | 1.3.5 (AA) | 4 | 0 |
| Pointer targets under 24×24 px | 2.5.8 (AA) | 9 | 0 |
| Links whose purpose is unclear from their text | 2.4.4 (A) | 0 | 0 |
Positive tabindex (breaks tab order) | 2.4.3 (A) | 0 | 0 |
aria-controls pointing at nothing | 4.1.2 (A) | 0 | 0 |
| Data tables with no header cells | 1.3.1 (A) | 0 | 0 |
| Pages missing a language declaration | 3.1.1 (A) | 0 | 0 |
| Horizontal page scrolling at 320 px wide | 1.4.10 (AA) | 0 | 0 |
| Content clipped at 200% text size | 1.4.4 (AA) | 0 | 0 |
| Content clipped under the text-spacing overrides | 1.4.12 (AA) | 0 | 0 |
| Focusable controls with no visible focus indicator | 2.4.7 (AA) | 0 | 0 |
| Animation still running under reduced-motion | 2.3.3 | 1 | 0 |
| Dialogs with no accessible name | 4.1.2 (A) | all | 0 |
| Non-dialogs wrongly marked as dialogs | 4.1.2 (A) | 4 | 0 |
| Dialogs Escape failed to close | 2.1.2 (A) | all | 0 |
| Text clipped by a line clamp at 200% | 1.4.4 (AA) | 1 | 0 |
About the contrast number
The 406 failures were real and are fixed. They were not cosmetic: they included the brand teal used as body text on white (1.9:1, where 4.5:1 is required), footer text at 2.16:1, and a control in the homepage demo whose label rendered near-white on a near-white background at 1.05:1. Each was corrected by darkening the text colour to the nearest value that clears the threshold while holding the same hue, so the brand palette is unchanged — a teal is still the same teal, just legible.
One honest caveat on method. Contrast can only be computed exactly when the background is a solid colour, and that is where the zero above applies. Where text sits on a gradient, we instead sample the pixels actually painted behind each glyph. That second method found eight more genuine failures in the signed-in app’s sidebar — text as low as 1.72:1 — which are also fixed.
It currently leaves 37 unresolved readings: 36 inside the animated product mockups on the marketing pages, which render at a reduced scale so their text is finer than a pixel grid can measure cleanly, and one on an element that another element overlaps in the capture. Each was checked individually — the mockup text sits on dark gradients and the overlapped one is grey on white at 5.4:1, so all of them pass. We would rather tell you the method has a boundary than quote a round number that hides it.
What is built in
Each item here is asserted by one of the runners listed under
How we test — the behavioural ones by
verify-a11y-claims.js, which drives the real interface. If one of these stops being
true, a test fails rather than this page quietly becoming wrong.
- Keyboard operation throughout. Every interactive control is reachable and operable by keyboard, with a visible focus outline (2–3 px depending on the control).
- Dialogs behave. Opening one moves focus into it; it announces its own name; Escape closes it; and focus returns to the control that opened it.
- Skip link and landmarks on every page. All 89 pages have a "skip to main content" link and a main region, so keyboard and screen-reader users do not have to walk the navigation on every page.
- State is never carried by colour alone. Status chips, job states and alerts all carry text as well as colour.
- Reduced motion is honoured. If your system asks for reduced motion, the scroll animations and looping effects stop.
- Text scales. The interface has its own text-size control, and holds up to 200% browser text enlargement without losing content.
- Reflows to one column. Usable at 320 px wide with no sideways scrolling. Wide data tables scroll inside their own container rather than forcing the whole page sideways.
- Drag-and-drop is never the only way. Jobs can be assigned and scheduled from the job record and from the dispatch controls, without dragging.
- Names are applied at runtime too. The application builds thousands of controls dynamically, so a pass runs in the page and gives each one an accessible name, keyboard access and dialog semantics as it appears.
Technical specifications
Accessibility here relies on the following working together in your browser. Where a technology is not supported or is turned off, some of the above may not apply:
- HTML with native semantics — real buttons, labels, headings, landmarks and tables.
- WAI-ARIA where a native element does not exist, principally dialogs, tabs and switches.
- CSS, including
prefers-reduced-motionand container-level scrolling for wide tables. - JavaScript is required. The application is a client-rendered single-page app; with JavaScript disabled it does not function. The marketing and legal pages, including this one, are readable without it.
What we have not tested
Stated plainly, because you may need it for a vendor review, and because a disabled user deserves to know where the gaps are before they hit one:
- No screen reader has been driven end-to-end by a person. This is the single biggest gap and the main reason we say "partially conformant". Automated checks confirm that names, roles and structure are present; they cannot confirm that VoiceOver, NVDA or JAWS announce a job status change, a live search result or a multi-step estimate in a sensible order. No automated tool substitutes for that.
- No independent third-party audit, and no formal VPAT. We do not hold one and do not claim one. If your procurement process requires an Accessibility Conformance Report, contact us and we will answer your questions in writing against this page.
- Voice control, switch access and screen magnification are unverified.
- Cognitive-accessibility review has not been done. Reading level, error-recovery wording and time-pressure in the dispatch screens have not been assessed by a specialist.
- The most complex screens carry the most risk. Dispatch drag-and-drop, the schedule board, the map view and the charts are the parts we would expect to fail a screen-reader review first. Drag-and-drop scheduling has a keyboard-accessible alternative (assignment from the job record), but the board itself is not a good experience without sight.
- Generated documents are out of scope of these tests. Estimates, invoices and purchase orders sent as PDFs have not been checked for tagged-PDF accessibility.
- WebKit keyboard traversal could not be measured automatically. Safari only tabs between links when the user turns that preference on, so our automated tab-order results come from Chromium.
- Card entry happens on Stripe's pages, not ours. We do not embed card fields anywhere, so paying an invoice hands you to Stripe's own checkout. That is good for card security, but it means the accessibility of that step belongs to Stripe and we cannot warrant it.
How we test
Measurement is code in the repository, not a one-off report, so it is re-run when the interface changes:
| Runner | What it establishes |
|---|---|
verify-wcag22.js | Names, roles, alt text, heading order, duplicate IDs, landmarks, target size, link purpose, autocomplete, language |
verify-contrast-fixplan.js | Contrast where the background is an unambiguous solid colour, plus the nearest conforming replacement for any failure |
verify-contrast-truth.js | Contrast over gradients and images, sampled from the pixels actually painted behind each glyph |
verify-reflow-focus.js | Reflow at 320 px, 200% text, text-spacing overrides, focus visibility, reduced motion |
verify-a11y-claims.js | The behavioural promises above, driven against the real interface: dialogs take focus, announce a name, close on Escape and give focus back; status is never colour-only; drag-and-drop has a non-drag path |
We deliberately compute contrast ratios, rendered sizes and counts directly rather than reporting rule IDs from a scanner. A rule ID tells you something failed; a ratio tells you by how much, and lets you argue with us.
Assessment approach: self-evaluation. This statement was prepared by Tradellen LLC using the automated measurement described above, plus manual review of the results. It has not been reviewed or approved by an external body. Statement prepared 3 August 2026; the measurements were taken on that date against the code released on it.
Compatibility
Tradellen is built to current web standards and tested in Chromium- and WebKit-based browsers on desktop and mobile. It should work with assistive technology that supports those browsers. Because we have not completed screen-reader testing, we cannot yet name specific screen reader and browser pairings as verified.
Tell us where it fails
If any part of Tradellen is difficult or impossible for you to use, we want the specific case, and we will treat it as a defect rather than a suggestion.
Email hello@tradellen.com
with ACCESSIBILITY in the subject line, or call
+1 (513) 801-1536.
Please include the page or screen, what you were trying to do, and the browser and assistive
technology you were using, if you know them.
- We aim to acknowledge every report within 2 business days.
- We aim to give you an assessment and a plan, with a target date, within 10 business days.
- If something blocks you from doing your work, tell us and we will find you a way to complete the task while the fix is being built — including doing it for you.
- If you need information from the product in a different format — a report, an invoice, an export — ask and we will provide it.
If we do not put it right
Say so in reply and it is escalated within Tradellen LLC rather than closed. If you are still not satisfied, you are entitled to take it further, and we would rather tell you how than have you find out the hard way:
- United States. Complaints about a place of public accommodation under the ADA go to the US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division at civilrights.justice.gov.
- European Union. The European Accessibility Act is enforced by a designated authority in each member state. Complaints go to the authority in the country where you live; the list is maintained by your national government.
- United Kingdom. The Equality Advisory and Support Service handles accessibility complaints under the Equality Act 2010.
Nothing here asks you to give up any right, and contacting us first is not a condition of complaining anywhere else.
Where this page can be wrong
This statement describes the state of the product on the date at the top, measured by the runners named above. Software changes. If you find something on this page that is no longer true, that is itself a defect worth reporting — use the same address.