EU Accessibility Act Testing and Conformance Evidence
European Accessibility Act evidence should show how a covered product or service was checked against the applicable Annex I accessibility requirements, not just that a team ran an accessibility scan.
This page helps structure product , service accessibility information, /WCAG mappings, harmonised-standard assumptions, exception records, and practical test outputs.
Testing and conformance evidence under Directive (EU) 2019/882 should connect four things: the covered product or service, the relevant Annex I requirement, the method used to test or assess it, and the record that proves the conclusion. For products, that record belongs in the and EU declaration of conformity process. For services, it belongs in the information showing how the service meets the accessibility requirements and how service delivery remains controlled.
1
Section 1
Start with an Annex I evidence matrix
Annex I is the anchor for EAA accessibility evidence. A useful matrix separates product requirements, service requirements, sector-specific requirements, support-service information, and functional performance criteria so reviewers can see which requirements were applicable, tested, not applicable, or handled through an assessment.
For products, capture evidence for accessible instructions and warnings, user interface and functionality design, assistive-technology interoperability, packaging or maintenance instructions where relevant, and available support services. For services, capture evidence for accessible service information, websites, online applications, mobile services, support services, and any sector-specific functions such as banking identification and payments, e-book metadata, or e-commerce checkout.
Record the product model, software version, service journey, user interface, language version, support channel, and market release covered by the test.
Map each applicable Annex I item to a test case, inspection note, supplier declaration, design review, user research finding, or remediation ticket, and distinguish evidence of a test from the decision that the legal requirement is met.
Mark not-applicable items with the factual reason, such as no audio output, no biometric control, no video capability, no support service, or no self-service terminal.
Keep screenshots, screen-reader notes, keyboard results, colour and contrast checks, document checks, mobile-app checks, hardware interaction notes, and assistive-technology compatibility records with the mapped requirement. Record the sample, build, environment, tester, method, expected result, observed result, defect, and retest so another reviewer can understand the conclusion.
Commission overview confirming that the EAA covers selected products and services important for persons with disabilities and likely to face divergent national requirements.
products and services
Recommended next step
Connect accessibility test results to the applicable requirements
Use Sorena to connect Annex I requirements, test results, product files, service information, supplier inputs, standards mappings, and Article 14 exception records in one cited evidence model.
Separate product technical documentation from service information
Product evidence and service evidence are not the same file. For products, Annex IV requires that lets conformity with the relevant accessibility requirements be assessed. It should cover the applicable requirements and, as relevant, the design, manufacture, and operation of the product.
For services, requires information in the general terms and conditions or an equivalent document explaining how the service meets the accessibility requirements. That service record should describe the service in accessible formats, explain its operation, describe how the relevant Annex I requirements are met, and show that the service delivery process and monitoring keep the service compliant.
The manufacturer owns the product conformity file and must keep the and EU declaration of conformity for five years after the product is placed on the market. A service provider must keep its accessibility information for as long as the service operates. Importers and distributors still need enough product traceability and conformity evidence to perform their own checks and cooperate with an authority; a supplier report does not transfer the legal duty holder's responsibility.
Product file: general product description, applicable Annex I requirements, applied harmonised standards or technical specifications, non-standard solutions, test reports, production-control evidence, EU declaration of conformity, and evidence if used.
Service file: general service description in accessible formats, user journey and operation notes, Annex I service mapping, website or mobile-app accessibility results, support-channel evidence, monitoring process, and change-control triggers.
For product-service bundles, keep a cross-reference that shows which evidence supports the physical product, the embedded software, the online service, the mobile app, the payment or identity flow, and the support channel.
When suppliers provide modules, terminals, content, or accessibility claims, retain their declarations as inputs, then test the integrated user journey rather than treating supplier paperwork as the whole evidence record.
Article 7(3) sets the manufacturer's five-year retention period; the importer and distributor articles set their conformity checks; Annex IV sets product technical-documentation content; and Annex V sets the service information describing how accessibility requirements are met.
The manufacturer shall establish the technical documentation.
Product-law guidance supporting the need to keep conformity assessment, declarations, technical documentation, and operator responsibilities traceable.
The EU Declaration of Conformity
3
Section 3
Use EN 301 549 and WCAG with clear boundaries
V3.2.1 is useful ICT accessibility evidence because it covers functional performance statements and technical requirements for web content, documents, software, hardware, support services, and related ICT features. It includes requirement-by-requirement means for determining conformance, but Annex C does not provide a testing methodology. V3.2.1 supports the Web Accessibility Directive. ETSI now publishes EN 301 549 V4.1.1 (2026-09). Publication of an edition does not by itself establish an EAA presumption of conformity; verify the relevant Official Journal citation and the requirements it covers.
Do not reduce the EAA record to WCAG pass/fail results. WCAG evidence is important for web, document, and software interfaces, but EAA Annex I also includes product information, packaging, assistive-technology interoperability, support services, sector-specific service functions, and functional performance criteria. The test plan should therefore say where WCAG or applies and where another inspection, hardware test, service process check, or assessment is needed.
For websites and online applications, link WCAG or web checks to the specific Annex I service requirement for perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust electronic information.
For mobile apps and non-web software, document the applicable software clauses, assistive-technology support, keyboard or alternative input behaviour, status messages, labels, focus visibility, and error handling.
For hardware and terminals, test physical controls, text-to-speech, headset use, timed responses, tactilely discernible controls, audio compatibility, privacy of accessibility features, and operation without relying only on vision, hearing, speech, fine motor control, or colour.
For support services, keep call-centre, help-desk, relay, training, and technical-support scripts or process evidence showing that accessibility and assistive-technology compatibility information is communicated in accessible modes.
Historical ETSI overview of ICT accessibility requirements, WCAG and functional performance statements. The later published V4.1.1 edition supplies EAA mappings; publication alone does not establish an Article 15 presumption of conformity.
Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services
Official ETSI Human Factors page, retrieved 15 October 2026, listing published EN 301 549 V4.1.1 (2026-09). Publication is separate from Official Journal citation.
Annex I shows why WCAG-only evidence is incomplete for EAA products and services that involve hardware, support services, product information, or sector-specific service functions.
Functional performance criteria
4
Section 4
Document harmonised-standard reliance and Article 14 exceptions
Harmonised standards can help, but they do not erase the need for traceability. Article 15 gives a presumption of conformity only for harmonised standards or parts of standards whose references have been published in the Official Journal, and only insofar as those standards or parts cover the relevant EAA accessibility requirements.
If the team relies on because a requirement would fundamentally alter the product or service or impose a disproportionate burden, the record needs more than a risk note. Article 14 requires an assessment, documentation of relevant results, retention for five years calculated from the last making available of a product or after a service was last provided, authority access on request, renewal rules for service providers relying on disproportionate burden, and information to the relevant authorities when the exception is used. Microenterprises are exempt from the Article 14(8) information duty, and microenterprises dealing with products have a separate documentation derogation.
For each harmonised standard entry, record the standard name, version, OJEU reference status, parts applied in full or in part, covered Annex I requirements, uncovered requirements, and alternative solutions used where the standard was not applied.
Do not claim a presumption of conformity for a whole product or service when only some requirements are covered by the cited standard or when the cited standard is not the relevant OJEU-published reference.
For , keep the affected requirement, product or service scope, reason the requirement would change the basic nature or impose disproportionate burden, Annex VI criteria considered for a burden claim, alternative accessibility measures retained, approval owner, funding check, Article 14(8) information status, and next review trigger.
Service providers relying on disproportionate burden should calendar reassessment when the service changes, when authorities request it, and at least every five years.
An operator receiving public or private funding outside its own resources specifically to improve accessibility cannot rely on disproportionate burden under (6). Record that funding eligibility check before assessing costs.
Commission source explaining that harmonised standards are voluntary, require OJEU publication for legal effect, and are not the only way to demonstrate compliance.
Primary legal source for Annex I accessibility requirements, Article 14 exception assessments, Article 15 presumption of conformity, Annex IV product technical documentation, and Annex V service information.
Annex I is the binding source for product and service accessibility requirements that the evidence matrix must map against.
Article 7(3) sets the manufacturer's five-year retention period; the importer and distributor articles set their conformity checks; Annex IV sets product technical-documentation content; and Annex V sets the service information describing how accessibility requirements are met.
Show 2 more
Annex I shows why WCAG-only evidence is incomplete for EAA products and services that involve hardware, support services, product information, or sector-specific service functions.
Articles 14 and 15 define exception records and the limits of presumption of conformity from harmonised standards or technical specifications.
"accessibility requirements for products and services"
More quoted passages
"ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES"
"The manufacturer shall establish the technical documentation."
"Functional performance criteria"
"in so far as those standards or parts thereof cover those requirements"
General EU product-law guidance for conformity assessment, technical documentation, EU declarations of conformity, and limitations of harmonised-standard reliance.
Product-law guidance supporting the need to keep conformity assessment, declarations, technical documentation, and operator responsibilities traceable.
Product-law guidance supporting the caution that harmonised standards may not cover every applicable requirement or risk.
Historical overview of EN 301 549 scope, WCAG and V3.2.1 Web Accessibility Directive support. Use the published V4.1.1 source for the later EAA mappings.
Historical ETSI overview of ICT accessibility requirements, WCAG and functional performance statements. The later published V4.1.1 edition supplies EAA mappings; publication alone does not establish an Article 15 presumption of conformity.
"Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services"
Commission overview for EAA purpose and covered product and service context.
Commission overview confirming that the EAA covers selected products and services important for persons with disabilities and likely to face divergent national requirements.
Commission source for voluntary use of harmonised standards, OJEU publication, formal objections, and presumption-of-conformity context.
Commission source explaining that harmonised standards are voluntary, require OJEU publication for legal effect, and are not the only way to demonstrate compliance.
Published European standard. The cover identifies V4.1.1 (2026-09); its foreword distinguishes publication from Official Journal citation and the resulting legal presumption.
Official ETSI Human Factors page, retrieved 15 October 2026, listing published EN 301 549 V4.1.1 (2026-09). Publication is separate from Official Journal citation.