October 23, 2026
WCAG 2.2 new success criteria: what was added and removed
What are the new success criteria in WCAG 2.2? Published as a W3C Recommendation on 5 October 2023, WCAG 2.2 adds 9 success criteria compared with WCAG 2.1 and removes just one: 4.1.1 Parsing, which the W3C considers obsolete. According to the W3C, the other WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 success criteria are essentially the same in 2.2. The new criteria cover keyboard focus visibility, alternatives to dragging, pointer target size, where help is placed, re-entering information, and authentication. This article walks through each one with concrete examples, then explains what it changes for a site that is already live and for the upcoming French RGAA 5, for which the French government's digital directorate (DINUM) has announced the integration of WCAG 2.2 among the main planned changes.
WCAG 2.2 new success criteria at a glance
The 9 added criteria are spread across all three conformance levels: two at Level A, four at Level AA and three at Level AAA. They belong to four guidelines: 2.4 (Navigable), 2.5 (Input Modalities), 3.2 (Predictable) and 3.3 (Input Assistance).
The only removal is 4.1.1 Parsing, which the W3C describes as obsolete and which is no longer part of WCAG 2.2. The W3C points to its WCAG 2 FAQ for details. WCAG 2.2 also includes notes about different languages.
- Level A: 3.2.6 Consistent Help, 3.3.7 Redundant Entry.
- Level AA: 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum), 2.5.7 Dragging Movements, 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum), 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum).
- Level AAA: 2.4.12 Focus Not Obscured (Enhanced), 2.4.13 Focus Appearance, 3.3.9 Accessible Authentication (Enhanced).
- Removed: 4.1.1 Parsing.
Keyboard focus: 2.4.11, 2.4.12 and 2.4.13
People who can't use a mouse need to see what has keyboard focus. 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum), Level AA, requires that a component receiving focus is not entirely hidden by author-created content, so it stays at least partially visible. The W3C's example is a user moving focus while some items disappear behind a banner or a sticky footer.
2.4.12 Focus Not Obscured (Enhanced), Level AAA, goes further: no part of the component may be hidden by author-created content. The focused item must be fully visible.
2.4.13 Focus Appearance, also Level AAA, is about the focus indicator itself. Many people, including older people, can't see small changes in visual appearance. The indicator must be at least as large as the area of a 2 CSS pixel thick perimeter of the unfocused component, and have a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 between the same pixels in the focused and unfocused states.
- Check: tab through pages that have a sticky header or footer, a cookie banner or a chat widget, and watch whether the focused element slips behind it.
- Check for AAA: measure the size and contrast of your focus style.
Dragging and target size: 2.5.7 and 2.5.8
2.5.7 Dragging Movements, Level AA, requires that all functionality using a dragging movement can also be achieved with a single pointer (one point of contact) without dragging. Dragging is only exempt when it is essential or controlled by the user agent. The W3C describes a person who cannot hold the mouse button down and drag accurately enough to reorder a list. The fix it describes: clicking a list item reveals up and down arrows that change the order with simple clicks.
2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum), Level AA, sets a size of at least 24 by 24 CSS pixels for pointer input targets. Some people with physical impairments cannot click small buttons that are close together; the W3C's example is a user who hits "Cancel" when going for "Submit".
- Spacing: a smaller target is allowed if the 24 CSS pixel circles of undersized targets do not intersect another target or the circle of another undersized target.
- Equivalent: the same function is available through a different control on the same page that meets the criterion.
- Inline: the target is in a sentence, or its size is constrained by the line-height of surrounding non-target text.
- User agent control: the size is determined by the user agent (the browser, for example) and is not modified by the author.
- Essential: a particular presentation of the target is essential or legally required for the information being conveyed.
Consistent Help and Redundant Entry: 3.2.6 and 3.3.7
3.2.6 Consistent Help, Level A, helps people who need help find it more easily. If a page contains a help mechanism that is repeated on multiple pages within a set of pages, it must appear in the same relative order to other page content, unless the user initiates a change. It covers human contact details, a human contact mechanism, a self-help option and a fully automated contact mechanism. The W3C's example: a chat option that is always in the lower right corner of the page.
3.3.7 Redundant Entry, Level A, starts from the fact that some people with cognitive disabilities have difficulty remembering what they entered before. Information previously entered by or provided to the user that must be entered again in the same process has to be either auto-populated or available for the user to select. There are three exceptions: re-entering is essential, the information is required to ensure the security of the content, or the previously entered information is no longer valid.
A typical case: a multi-step appointment booking form that asks again for details given at an earlier step instead of carrying them over.
Accessible authentication: 3.3.8 and 3.3.9
3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum), Level AA, boils down to this: don't make people solve, recall or transcribe something to log in. A cognitive function test, such as remembering a password or solving a puzzle, must not be required at any step of an authentication process unless that step provides at least one of the options listed below.
The W3C notes give password manager support for password entry and copy and paste as examples of assistance. The W3C's example of another authentication method: entering your e-mail address, then clicking a link received by e-mail.
3.3.9 Accessible Authentication (Enhanced), Level AAA, keeps the same rule but drops the object recognition and personal content exceptions: asking users to click on pictures of cats to log in is no longer acceptable unless an alternative or an assistance mechanism is provided.
- Another authentication method that does not rely on a cognitive function test.
- A mechanism that assists the user in completing the test.
- The test is to recognize objects.
- The test is to identify non-text content the user provided to the website.
What WCAG 2.2 changes for an existing website
Because the WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 success criteria are essentially the same, work already done on them keeps its value. However, the 9 added criteria did not exist in WCAG 2.1, so an audit based on 2.1 did not evaluate them as criteria. Six of them are at Levels A and AA.
In practice, review first the components these criteria target: sticky elements that can hide focus, lists or sliders operated by dragging, small and closely spaced buttons and icons, the position of your help link or chat, multi-step forms, and login flows that rely on a password or a CAPTCHA. For 4.1.1 Parsing, there is no longer a requirement to check under WCAG 2.2.
WCAG 2.2 and France's RGAA 5: what DINUM announced
In an article published on 2 March 2026, DINUM stated that a new version of the RGAA, France's accessibility framework, version 5, was being drafted and that it should be published at the end of 2026. Changes to the technical testing method include integrating WCAG 2.2, alongside technical criteria and tests for mobile apps and office documents, and rewording and simplifying the criteria.
DINUM explains that RGAA 5 criteria will clarify or complete those of RGAA 4.1.2, then in force, without contradicting them, and that current or planned work based on RGAA 4.1.2 must under no circumstances be suspended or postponed. Accessibility statements made before RGAA 5 is published will remain valid for 18 months, within a limit of 3 years from their publication date.
On the legal side, DINUM announces that Arcom will be designated as the supervisory authority and that an online service will be set up to submit and publish accessibility statements. It also notes that failing to comply with digital accessibility legislation exposes organisations to sanctions. According to DINUM's March 2026 article, RGAA 5 was still being drafted; until its criteria are detailed, keep relying on RGAA 4.1.2, in force according to DINUM at the date of its article, while already taking the WCAG 2.2 criteria above into account. Conformly's free test and continuous monitoring can help you keep track of your pages' accessibility over time.
Frequently asked questions
What are the new success criteria in WCAG 2.2?
WCAG 2.2 adds 9 criteria: 2.4.11, 2.4.12 and 2.4.13 on keyboard focus, 2.5.7 on dragging, 2.5.8 on target size, 3.2.6 on consistent help, 3.3.7 on redundant entry, and 3.3.8 and 3.3.9 on accessible authentication.
Which success criterion was removed in WCAG 2.2?
4.1.1 Parsing, considered obsolete by the W3C, was removed from WCAG 2.2. The other WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 criteria are essentially the same.
When was WCAG 2.2 published?
WCAG 2.2 was published as a W3C Recommendation on 5 October 2023.
What is the minimum target size in WCAG 2.2?
2.5.8, Level AA, requires at least 24 by 24 CSS pixels, with exceptions: sufficient spacing, an equivalent control on the page, a target in a sentence or constrained by the line-height of text, a size determined by the user agent and not modified by the author, or a presentation that is essential or legally required.
Will RGAA 5 include WCAG 2.2?
Yes. According to DINUM's announcement of 2 March 2026, integrating WCAG 2.2 is one of the main planned changes for RGAA 5, which was then being drafted. It should be published at the end of 2026.
Further reading on Conformly
Sources
This article relies on the official sources listed at the end of the page.