Apply now

Accessibility statement for geovation.uk

This accessibility statement applies to geovation.uk. This website is run by Geovation, an Ordnance Survey initiative.

How accessible this website is

We know some parts of this website are not fully accessible:

  • This website cannot be navigated only using the keyboard
  • Some navigation features like buttons and menus will not be announced by screen readers
  • You cannot skip to the main content when using a screen reader across the site
  • Some page headings are not in a logical order so navigation by screen readers may be difficult and time consuming
  • There are no text alternatives for some non decorative imagery
  • Customising text sizes will cause font rendering issues on some pages
  • The colour contrast of text in some headings and buttons is low
  • Our video content does not have captions

Reporting accessibility problems with this website

We’re always looking to improve the accessibility of this website. If you find any problems not listed on this page or think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, contact us.

Enforcement procedure

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (the ‘accessibility regulations’). If you’re not happy with how we respond to your complaint, contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS).

Technical information about this website’s accessibility

Geovation is committed to making its website accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.

Compliance status

This website is not compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard. The non-compliances are listed below.

Non-accessible content

The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons.

Non-compliance with the accessibility regulations

  • Rendering issues occur on some pages when applying custom CSS text styling. It is expected that text is displayed without loss of functionality or content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.12 (Text Spacing).
  • Accesskey has been defined on all pages. It is expected that page-specified shortcuts and accesskeys do not conflict with existing browser and screen reader shortcuts. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 (Keyboard).
  • On some pages the heading structure is incorrect. It is expected that the headings are correctly nested, e.g. a ‘h2’ heading is nested in a ‘h1’ heading. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 (Bypass Blocks).
  • There is no autocomplete attribute present on the contact page. It is expected that common input fields are accurately identified with the ‘autocomplete’ attribute, allowing their purpose to be programmatically determined. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.5 (Identify Input Purpose).
  • On some pages there is no visible tab focus indicator. It is expected that a visible indicator is present to highlight the element in focus for any keyboard operable user interface components. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.7 (Focus Visible).
  • Page frames are not appropriately titled for some pages, so they cannot be bypassed. It is expected that frames are appropriately titled, which is a sufficient technique for bypassing individual frames. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 (Bypass Blocks).
  • Some page headings and labels do not describe a topic or purpose. It is expected that headings and labels describe their associated topic or purpose. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.6 (Headings and Labels).
  • Users are unable to tab to interact with all user interface components only using the keyboard on some pages. It is expected that all page functionality is available using the keyboard, unless the functionality cannot be accomplished in any known way using only the keyboard (e.g. freehand drawing). This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 (Keyboard).
  • When viewing the memberships page, multiple instances of identical link text are present. It is expected that links (or form image buttons) with the same text that direct the user to different locations are readily distinguishable. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 (Link Purpose (In Context)).
  • The tab order for pages is not logical for the sitewide cookie banner or any page containing a carousel. It is expected that the navigation order of the page is logical and consistent. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 (Focus Order).
  • Adjacent image links and text links to the same location are not combined on the blog page. It is expected that text links and associated linked images are combined within the DOM. Images should have null alt attributes in this instance. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-Text Content).
  • No ‘Skip to main content’ CTA or similar is present across the site. It is expected that a ‘Skip to main content’ CTA or similar is provided to skip common navigational elements that are repeated across pages. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 (Bypass Blocks).
  • Embedded multimedia is not identified by accessible text on some pages. It is expected that embedded multimedia like embedded video is appropriately titled. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-Text Content).
  • Page regions are not identified with ARIA landmarks across the site. It is expected that page regions are identified with landmarks. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and Relationships).
  • Copy has insufficient contrast against its background across the site. It is expected that for the visual presentation of text and images of text a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 is present, where text is less than 18 point (or 14 point bold). Where text is larger, a contrast ratio of 3:1 is expected. Exceptions are made for text that is decorative, incidental or logotypes. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.3 (Contrast (Minimum)).
  • Alternative text is not present for non-decorative imagery across the site. It is expected that all non-decorative images, including form image buttons, and image map hotspots have appropriate, equivalent alternative text. For linked images, the alternative text should be the name of the linked page. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-Text Content).
  • Decorative imagery contains inappropriate alternative attributes across the site. Images that are not informative and do not convey content should be given null alternative text (alt=””) or implemented as CSS backgrounds. The same applies to decorative images with content already conveyed in text. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-Text Content).
  • When navigating pages on a mobile device with iOS Voiceover or Android Talkback enabled, swiping gestures will navigate the user to the hamburger menu after all other page elements. The user also is forced to swipe through the menu without expanding it. These issues occur across the site. It is expected that the menu is swiped to first and that the menu options are only announced when the user has opted to expand the menu. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  • Menu options are announced without interaction on the blog page when using devices with iOS Voiceover or Android Talkback enabled. It is expected that the menu options are only announced to the user after they have opted to expand the dropdown menu. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  • Icons in the sitewide page footer cannot be correctly announced when using devices with iOS Voiceover or Android Talkback enabled. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  • Pre-recorded on the site video lacks synchronised captions. It is expected that synchronised captions are provided for non-live, web-based video (YouTube videos, etc.). Subtitles refer to only what is spoken, whereas captions refer to subtitles for every sound made. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.2 (Captions (Pre-Recorded)).
  • Pre-recorded video on the site lacks text transcripts or audio description. It is expected that a descriptive text transcript OR audio description audio track is provided for non-live, web-based video. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.3 (Audio Description or Media Alternative (Pre-Recorded)).
  • There is no alternative audio track for pre-recorded video on the site. It is expected that a second, user-selectable, audio track that includes audio descriptions or a version of a movie with audio descriptions using SMIL or any player that supports audio and video is provided. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.5 (Audio Description (Pre-Recorded)).
  • There are HTML validation errors across the site. These include: Missing start and end tags, Elements not nested according to their specifications, elements contain duplicate attributes and IDs that are not unique, except where the specifications allow these features. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 (Parsing).
  • Empty links are present across the site. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  • Some pages contain suspicious link text. A suspicious link can be defined as link text contains extraneous text or may not make sense out of context. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  • Some pages contain redundant links. A redundant link is where adjacent links go to the same URL. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  • Some pages contain empty headings. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  • There is no markup present for some features to aid accessibility when navigating with NVDA or macOS VoiceOver assistive technologies on some pages. It is expected that interactive features like filter dropdowns and maps are identified and announced to the user correctly. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).
  • Additional content like status messages are only partially announced by screen readers on the contact page. It is expected that any status messages such as form submission confirmations are presented in full via assistive technologies in real time. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.3 (Status Messages).
  • Additional content like status messages are not announced by macOS VoiceOver on the contact page. It is expected that any status messages such as form submission confirmations or errors are presented via assistive technologies in real time. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.3 (Status Messages).
  • It is not possible for a user of the speech recognition software Dragon Naturally Speaking to select form fields by saying the visual label on the contact page. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value).

Content that’s not within the scope of the accessibility regulations

PDFs and other documents

Some of our PDFs are essential to providing our services. For example, we have PDFs with information on the terms of the Data Exploration License. By the end of 2021, we plan to either fix these or replace them with accessible HTML pages.

The accessibility regulations do not require us to fix PDFs or other documents published before 23 September 2018 if they’re not essential to providing our services.

Any new PDFs or Word documents we publish will meet accessibility standards.

Live video

We do not plan to add captions to live video streams because live video is exempt from meeting the accessibility regulations.

What we’re doing to improve accessibility

Geovation is currently developing a new website which will meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard. The new website will go live before the end of 2021. This page will be updated as part of the new site.

Preparation of this accessibility statement

This statement was prepared on 08/06/2021. It was last reviewed on 08/06/2021.

This website was last tested on 17/04/2021. The test was carried out by Zoonou, an external auditor on behalf of Ordnance Survey.

The evaluation methodology used by Zoonou for the audit is based on WCAG-EM. Where possible, a structured sample was used instead of a randomly selected sample. Zoonou conducted manual accessibility audits using both code reviews and assistive technology, these were then supplemented with automated reviews using Sortsite.