Verified vs. Needs-Human
Automated testing reliably catches some accessibility problems — missing alt text, low contrast, unlabelled fields, invalid ARIA — but it cannot judge everything. Whether alt text is meaningful, whether focus order matches intent, whether a media alternative is adequate: those need a person. Axeible never blurs that line. Findings are split into what was automatically verified and what still needs human review.
What our documents say — and don't
Axeible generates an accessibility statement, an ACR/VPAT, and a dated remediation record. Each describes what was checked and by what method. None of them certify compliance or claim a legal outcome, because no honest tool can.
An auditable trail
Decisions stick and stay accountable. When you mark an issue ignored or a false positive, that state is remembered, excluded from future scans, and recorded — so your remediation history reflects what you actually did and why.
Why honesty is the point
Overstating accessibility capability is exactly what regulators have penalised. Describing precisely what the tool does — and being candid about what it doesn't — is both the ethical choice and the strongest protection for a merchant acting in good faith.