Testing methodology
Clear evidence starts with a clear account of what was tested.
BarrierTrace combines repeatable automated checks with attributable manual and governance evidence. This page explains the current testing boundary, the components involved and what the results can reasonably support.
01
Automated evidence
BarrierTrace runs the open-source GOVTNZ CWAC scanner in its own managed scanning service. The current scanner build uses a pinned CWAC source revision and axe-core 4.12.1, together with browser-based checks for reflow, readability and page titles.
Automated results identify issues that the configured rules can determine in the pages, viewports and states reached during a scan. They do not establish that an entire website or user journey conforms to WCAG.
02
Coverage and comparable history
Every result is interpreted with its page and viewport coverage. Saved core pages provide a stable basis for comparison over time. Additional exploratory pages can help discover issues, but their findings remain separate from the comparable trend so a changing sample does not silently move the score.
BarrierTrace scans public HTTPS pages. Private, authenticated and internal-only journeys are not currently crawled by the automated service and must not be treated as covered.
03
Manual and governance evidence
Teams can record keyboard, focus, zoom, reflow, screen-reader, error handling and representative journey checks alongside automated results. Manual records retain the tester, scope, method, date, outcome, notes and revision history.
Governance records can include accessibility-statement information, review dates, known limitations, alternatives, exceptions and approval context. Automated, manual and governance evidence remain visibly distinct.
04
Scores, reports and limitations
BarrierTrace scores are prioritisation signals, not WCAG compliance percentages. Reports retain scope, samples, methods, framework versions, unresolved evidence and historical context. Evidence packs support review and governance; they are not certificates or legal opinions.
A defensible conformance conclusion requires an appropriate evaluation process, complete user journeys, expert judgement and, where possible, research or testing involving disabled people.
05
Open-source components and attribution
- GOVTNZ CWAC, used from pinned source revision
078003265e0cc1e9a9fc0361724e93d2066880faunder the GNU General Public License v3.0. - Deque axe-core version 4.12.1 under the Mozilla Public License 2.0.
BarrierTrace is independently developed. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the New Zealand Government, GOVTNZ or Deque Systems. Third-party names and projects remain the property of their respective owners.