Link Purpose (In Context)
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
The purpose of each link can be determined from its text alone, or from its text together with its programmatically determined context, except where the purpose would be ambiguous to everyone.
Normative text
Verbatim from WCAG 2.2, W3C Recommendation 12 December 2024. Underlined terms are defined below.
The purpose of each link can be determined from the link text alone or from the link text together with its programmatically determined link context, except where the purpose of the link would be ambiguous to users in general.
Not required by the normative text
Common claims that this criterion does not support. Don't log these as WCAG failures.
- Unique text for every link. "Read more" passes when its programmatically determined context (W3C's note gives the enclosing sentence, paragraph, list item or table cell as examples) makes the purpose clear.
- Warning that a link opens in a new window.
Definitions used (3)
Glossary definitions are normative. Their notes are informative.
- link purpose
-
nature of the result obtained by activating a hyperlink
- programmatically determined link context
-
additional information that can be programmatically determined from relationships with a link, combined with the link text, and presented to users in different modalities
Informative notes (1)
Since screen readers interpret punctuation, they can also provide the context from the current sentence, when the focus is on a link in that sentence.
- ambiguous to users in general
-
the purpose cannot be determined from the link and all information of the web page presented to the user simultaneously with the link (i.e., readers without disabilities would not know what a link would do until they activated it)
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 2.4.4, so raise them as usability defects. Known failures, including failures of related criteria, are listed in Tier 1.
Screen reader users who browse a list of links hear "Read more" ten times with no context, even though each link passes.
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.
Write link text that makes sense on its own, or add visually hidden text to make it unique.
W3C's Understanding document and techniques for SC 2.4.4 ↗ 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 2.4.4 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.
No provision in the current draft covers link purpose.
Related, not a successor
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.”