Bypass Blocks
Tier 1 · The normative floor
Baseline compliance
What the normative text of WCAG 2.2 requires, and nothing more. Only a failure of this tier is a WCAG failure.
The bare minimum
A mechanism is available to bypass blocks of content that are repeated on multiple pages.
Normative text
Verbatim from WCAG 2.2, W3C Recommendation 12 December 2024. Underlined terms are defined below.
Not required by the normative text
Common claims that this criterion does not support. Don't log these as WCAG failures.
- A "skip to content" link specifically. The requirement is a mechanism; W3C's Understanding document also accepts properly marked-up headings or landmarks.
Definitions used (2)
Glossary definitions are normative. Their notes are informative.
- mechanism
-
process or technique for achieving a result
Informative notes (2)
The mechanism may be explicitly provided in the content, or may be relied upon to be provided by either the platform or by user agents, including assistive technologies.
The mechanism needs to meet all success criteria for the conformance level claimed.
- web page
-
a non-embedded resource obtained from a single URI using HTTP plus any other resources that are used in the rendering or intended to be rendered together with it by a user agent
Informative notes (2)
Although any "other resources" would be rendered together with the primary resource, they would not necessarily be rendered simultaneously with each other.
For the purposes of conformance with these guidelines, a resource must be "non-embedded" within the scope of conformance to be considered a web page.
Tier 2 · The gap
Usability & user impact
Where content can meet this criterion and still make things harder for people with disabilities. These are not failures of SC 2.4.1, so raise them as usability defects. Known failures, including failures of related criteria, are listed in Tier 1.
Headings and landmarks help screen reader users but do nothing for sighted keyboard users, who must still tab through the whole header.
Tier 3 · The golden path
Recommended best practice
The pattern that meets the floor, closes the gap, and avoids audit disputes. A recommendation, not a requirement.
Provide a skip link that becomes visible on focus, as well as landmarks and headings.
W3C's Understanding document and techniques for SC 2.4.1 ↗ are informative: sufficient techniques show ways to pass, and documented failures show common ways to fail, but neither changes what the criterion requires.
How SC 2.4.1 maps to the WCAG 3 draft
From this site's reviewed map to the WCAG 3 editor's draft. It's an interpretation: W3C has not published a mapping.
Focus relevant's test procedure asks for a way to skip groups of repeated interactive elements, such as site navigation.
Successor provisions
From WCAG 2.2, section 5.1: “The main content of WCAG 2.2 is normative and defines requirements that impact conformance claims. Introductory material, appendices, sections marked as "non-normative", diagrams, examples, and notes are informative (non-normative). Non-normative material provides advisory information to help interpret the guidelines but does not create requirements that impact a conformance claim.”