About e-Include

What we publish

Reference material on European accessibility law and standards, on easy-to-read language, on assistive technology, and on the disability rights the obligations follow from. We write for people who have to do something: publish a compliant service, commission an easy-to-read version, choose a communication aid, or work out whether a rule applies to them.

We do not sell audits, certificates or conformity labels, and there is no such thing as a European accessibility certificate for a website in any case.

This domain has a history

Until 2020 this address belonged to the e-journal of Inclusion Europe. We are not that organisation and we are not its successor; Inclusion Europe continues to operate at its own address. We set out the full account, including what we did with the old URLs, in aseparate article.

How we work

• Sources. Legal texts, standards and official interpretations first: directives, the EN 301 549 standard, WCAG, CRPD General Comments. Where we describe practice rather than rules, we say so.
• No invented specifics. We do not publish figures, dates or prices we cannot support. Where a version number or a deadline is genuinely uncertain, we say that rather than picking one.
• Easy-to-read summaries. Every page opens with two or three sentences in simple language. These are written by us and have not been through a formal validation group, so they do not carry the easy-to-read logo. We explain that distinction on ourstandards page.
• Corrections. Substantiated errors get fixed. Significant changes are noted on the page.

How the site is funded

e-Include is a commercial publication. It is funded by advertising and by partner links to vendors. If you buy something after following a partner link, we may receive a commission; the price is the same for you either way.

What this does not change: no vendor pays for a mention, for a position, or for a rating, and no vendor sees an article before it is published. Where we list providers, the reason for each one being there is written next to it. Where we have no tested recommendation, the slot stays empty rather than being filled with whatever pays.

We think that is the only defensible arrangement on this subject in particular, because the accessibility market contains a substantial number of products sold on claims that do not survive contact with a user. Our article onaccessibility overlays is the clearest example of us writing against a category that would happily pay for coverage.

Who writes this

The site is written and edited by a small team rather than by named individual authors, and we do not attach personal bylines or invented credentials to the pages. Editorial responsibility for the publication sits with the operator named in theimprint.

Tell us we are wrong

If something here is inaccurate, out of date, or unusable with your assistive technology, we want to know. The fastest route is [email protected] or thecontact form. Include the page address, and for accessibility problems the browser and assistive technology you are using.

That last request is not a formality. A site about accessibility that is itself hard to use is the one failure we have no excuse for.