WCAG 3.0 is an active W3C Working Draft in development by the AGWG. Requirements, assertions, the conformance model and reporting tiers are still being developed and may change. The latest published draft is the 10 September 2026 Working Draft; this site follows the editors’ draft, which also includes exploratory provisions.
developingAssertion
Conventional Layout Review
Group: layout • Guideline: recognizable-layouts
Summary in Plain English
An organisational assertion: the organisation states that it reviewed layout conventions for comparable products and either followed a conventional pattern or tested a non-conventional one.
Why It Matters
Conventional layouts are what let people apply what they already know. Departing from them without testing shifts the learning cost onto users with cognitive disabilities.
0
Test Procedure from the W3C Draft
Upstream has a test heading for this provision but has not written
the procedure yet, and no test steps have been written here.
Generic advice would apply to almost any provision, so none is shown.
W3C Working Group Status
W3C Maturity Status:developing
Track / Group:layout
The draft records no open editors' notes on this provision.
W3C Threads on This Provision
2 GitHub threads carrying 0 comments,
fetched from w3c/wcag3 by the
tracker. Titles, numbers and states are the threads' own.
Nobody has read these threads and written up the positions yet, so
only the threads themselves are listed.
[Title, role, or organization] asserts that:
* We have reviewed layout conventions for similar products or processes.
* The layout used follows a conventional pattern or a tested non-conventional pattern was used.
::assertion-required
* title, role, or organization making the assertion (if different from the conformance claim)
* date of assertion (if different from the date of the conformance claim)
::assertion-recommended
* report covering review of layouts for similar products or processes
* design log capturing decision to use specific layouts
* if a non-conventional layout is used, usability testing results that demonstrate the utility of the approach taken