Our commitment

We aim to meet WCAG 2.1 Level AA on seoforarchitect.com, and we build client sites to the same target. That means sufficient color contrast, keyboard operability for every interactive element, meaningful alternative text on images, correct heading structure, labeled form fields, and visible focus indicators.

We describe this as a target rather than a certification. Accessibility on a living site is a maintenance discipline — a new plugin, an embedded widget, or an uploaded image without alt text can introduce a barrier between audits. Any organization claiming permanent, guaranteed conformance is overstating what's achievable.

Why this matters more on architecture sites

Portfolio-driven sites are among the least accessible on the web, and the causes are the same ones that hurt their search performance. Renders and project photography uploaded without descriptive alt text are invisible to screen readers and equally invisible to search engines. Custom lightbox galleries that can't be operated by keyboard are also often unindexable. Low-contrast type over hero images fails contrast checks and hurts readability on the phone screens most prospective clients are actually using.

This is why we treat accessibility and technical SEO for architecture portfolios as one workstream rather than two budgets. Fixing the image pipeline, the heading hierarchy, and the gallery markup serves both at once. A firm that invests in accessible markup generally sees indexation improve as a side effect.

Known limitations

We publish these rather than claim a clean bill of health. This site runs on WordPress with a page builder, and that architecture carries known accessibility friction we're working through:

• Third-party embeds — maps, forms, and scheduling widgets — render markup we don't fully control, and some do not expose accessible labels.
• Decorative background imagery applied through the page builder does not always carry an explicit null alt attribute, which can produce redundant screen reader output.
• Some earlier posts and pages predate our current alternative-text standard and are being remediated as they're updated.
• Any PDF documents offered for download have not been fully remediated for screen reader use. We will supply the contents in an accessible format on request.

We reassess quarterly and prioritize whatever a real user reports over whatever a scanner flags.

Assessment approach

We assess using a combination of automated tooling and manual review: keyboard-only navigation of every template, screen reader spot checks, contrast verification against the design tokens, and testing at mobile breakpoints. Automated scanners catch a minority of real issues, so manual review is where the substantive findings come from.

Reporting a barrier

If you hit something on this site you can't access, tell us and we'll fix it. Email info@seopals.com with the page URL, what you were trying to do, and the assistive technology and browser you were using if you know them. We aim to acknowledge within three business days and to provide the information in an alternative format in the meantime if that's what you need.

Feedback informs the roadmap

Reports go into the same backlog as technical fixes, not a separate courtesy queue. Where a barrier comes from a third-party component we don't control, we'll say so, raise it with the vendor, and look for a replacement rather than leaving it open indefinitely.

Back to SEOPals technical SEO for architecture portfolios  ·  Technical SEO service