Journey-level checks
Inspect login, navigation, forms, dialogs, errors, and other interactive states in the browser.
Inclusive UX / accessibility
Make accessibility part of the journey, not a late checklist.
Matrix QA helps teams observe accessibility-relevant behavior during authorized browser journeys, while making clear that automated evidence complements—not replaces—manual and assistive-technology review.
matrixqa / run-001
$ matrixqa inspect --target authorized-url
[01] browser session initialized
[02] journey instructions loaded
[03] evidence capture active
✓ For teams building a practical accessibility testing loop around real user flows.
report → screenshots · console · network · timestamps
Keyboard-aware review
Use keyboard navigation as a deliberate test dimension and record where focus or interaction becomes difficult.
Evidence for fixes
Pair a visible state with the URL, action, screenshot, console signal, and timing needed for follow-up.
Honest coverage limits
Automated checks can find some issues; they cannot establish complete WCAG conformance or replace disabled-user testing.
The workflow
From one URL to evidence you can act on.
- 01
Select an important journey
Choose a flow with forms, navigation, errors, dialogs, or other interaction states used by real people.
- 02
Test the interaction
Observe labels, focus order, keyboard access, feedback, contrast, and responsive behavior within the authorized journey.
- 03
Combine signals and review
Use browser evidence as input to manual inspection, assistive-technology testing, and remediation.
What automated accessibility testing can and cannot do
Automated evaluation can surface common issues such as missing labels, invalid properties, or some contrast and structure problems. It cannot reliably judge every question of meaning, task completion, focus usability, error clarity, or compatibility with assistive technology.
For that reason, Matrix QA should be used as one signal in an accessibility program, not as a certificate of WCAG compliance.
Test the states people experience
Many accessibility problems are state-specific: a validation message is not announced, a modal traps or loses focus, a menu cannot be reached by keyboard, or an error appears far from the field it describes. A journey-based review can expose these transitions better than a static page scan.
See automated browser testing and how a journey is recorded for the execution model.
Build a complete evaluation loop
Combine automated checks with keyboard-only testing, screen-reader review, content inspection, responsive checks, and feedback from disabled users. Record the observed barrier, affected task, expected experience, and evidence for the fix.
Use evidence-based bug reports to structure the handoff.
Explore the QA library
View all capabilitiesFind the testing guide that matches your next question.
Questions teams ask
Does an automated check prove WCAG compliance?
No. Automated checks cover only some accessibility requirements. Complete evaluation needs manual, assistive-technology, content, and user-centered review.
What should I test with a keyboard?
Move through interactive controls, menus, dialogs, forms, validation messages, and focus changes without a mouse. Record any unreachable control, confusing order, or lost focus.
Can Matrix QA replace an accessibility specialist?
No. Matrix QA can help capture repeatable browser evidence, while specialists and disabled users provide essential context and evaluation depth.
Turn your next deploy into a proof, not a guess.
Start with one authorized URL. Matrix QA walks the journey and returns the evidence your team needs to decide what ships.