A 19-point checklist for self-checking multilingual manual accessibility against EAA, ADA, WCAG, PDF/UA, and EN 18339 before release — run in two stages: self-check and independent reviewer check.
- Who it’s for Technical writers, documentation managers, localization and QA reviewers, and manufacturers producing manuals with AI tools.
- When to use Right after building your digital and print deliverables, through final accessibility sign-off.
- See also For the background and how to apply each item, see the companion “Multilingual Manual Accessibility Guide.” This checklist covers industry-neutral, universal items and does not replace the source standards or legal counsel.
Grading
- Critical (A) A miss can directly cause launch delays, recalls, or legal disputes. Must be zero before sign-off.
- Major (B) A miss invites customer claims, rework, or loss of brand trust. Target zero where possible.
- Minor (C) Low impact individually, but quality variance and operating cost rise as misses accumulate.
- Check items in priority order: Critical (A), then Major (B), then Minor (C).
- Run two stages: author self-check, then an independent reviewer cross-check.
- Mark items that don’t apply as N/A and record the reason in Notes.
Checklist (19 items)
A · Regulatory scope
| No | Check item · Criterion | Grade | Self | Reviewer | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US ADA / Section 508 applicability is confirmed Digital documents for US federal or state procurement and places of public accommodation fall under Section 508 and the ADA; applicability analysis complete. | A | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 2 | EU EAA (effective June 28, 2025) applicability is confirmed If the product ships to the EU, its manuals and online documentation must meet EAA accessibility requirements; scope analysis complete. | A | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 3 | Applicable standards for the manual are stated WCAG 2.1/2.2 AA, PDF/UA, EN 17210, EN 301549, EN 18339 and other applicable standards are declared. | B | ☐ | ☐ |
B · Digital accessibility
| No | Check item · Criterion | Grade | Self | Reviewer | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Body and UI text-to-background contrast is at least 4.5:1 (3:1 for large text) WCAG 1.4.3. Check digital manual and HTML screens for violations beyond the automated checker. | A | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 5 | Images carry appropriate alternative text Informative images convey meaning; decorative images use empty alt. Check for missing or untranslated alt text. | A | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 6 | Document structure (headings, lists, tables) uses semantic tags WCAG 1.3.1. Use h1–h6, list, and table semantics; never convey structure by visual styling alone. | A | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 7 | All content, navigation, and search work with the keyboard alone WCAG 2.1.1. Full access by Tab / Enter / Space with no keyboard traps. | A | |||
| 8 | The keyboard focus indicator is visually clear WCAG 2.4.7. Focus indicator contrast of at least 3:1. | B | |||
| 9 | PDFs conform to PDF/UA (ISO 14289) Tagged PDF with correct reading order, alt text, heading structure, table structure, and form-field labeling. | A |
C · Multilingual accessibility
| No | Check item · Criterion | Grade | Self | Reviewer | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Language attributes (html lang, span lang) are set correctly Required for automatic screen-reader language detection, including inline language switches on multilingual pages. | A | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 11 | RTL languages have the correct screen-reader reading order dir=”rtl” applied; tables and lists keep a right-to-left reading flow. | B | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 12 | Text-to-speech compatibility for CJK and Indic languages is verified Sample-test that major screen readers pronounce non-Latin scripts correctly. | B | ☐ | ☐ |
D · Non-digital accessibility
| No | Check item · Criterion | Grade | Self | Reviewer | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | Print manuals and labels reflect EN 18339 (non-digital information accessibility) EAA harmonized standard. Provide visual / auditory / tactile multisensory paths; check text size, contrast, and spacing. | A | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 14 | Print body text meets the minimum type size for its reading context At least 10 pt for general users, 12–14 pt for low-vision readers, judged at a 40 cm hand-held distance. | B | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 15 | Print manuals provide a digital-copy access path (e.g., a QR code) An alternative channel for users who cannot access non-digital media. | B | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 16 | Product labels and pictograms do not rely on a single (visual-only) sensory channel Convey safety and status information through visual + auditory or visual + tactile (braille / embossing) paths. | C |
E · User testing & sign-off
| No | Check item · Criterion | Grade | Self | Reviewer | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17 | Usability is tested with real assistive technology (screen reader, magnification, keyboard-only) Beyond automated checks, run at least one hands-on cycle with a real user or assistive-technology tester. | A | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 18 | An accessibility conformance statement is written and published EAA / EN 301549. Publish a VPAT / ACR stating applicable standards, non-conformances, and a contact. | B | ☐ | ☐ | |
| 19 | Accessibility results and evidence are retained for audit Keep automated-check results, assistive-technology test logs, and sign-off dates (links to Part 8). | B | ☐ | ☐ |
Frequently asked questions
- Can we ship if a Critical (A) item is still open?
As a rule, no. A Critical (A) miss can be a direct ADA / Section 508 or EAA violation that blocks market entry or government procurement, so these must be at zero before sign-off. If one genuinely cannot be closed in time, state the non-conformance and a remediation date in your accessibility conformance statement. - What are a VPAT and an ACR, and who produces them?
A VPAT (Voluntary Product Accessibility Template) is the form used to document how well a product meets accessibility standards; the completed, published result is an ACR (Accessibility Conformance Report). The party that builds and reviews the deliverable produces it, and for US government procurement it is effectively a required submission. - Can the same person run both the self-check and the reviewer check?
It’s not recommended. The point of the cross-check is to catch what the author missed from an outside perspective, so a separate person who wasn’t involved in the build should verify the work with hands-on assistive-technology testing. - How long should we retain accessibility evidence?
Keep automated-check results, assistive-technology test logs, and sign-off dates for post-market audit and enforcement. Because the EU can require proof of conformance after a product reaches the market, retaining the records for the product’s lifecycle is the safe default.
Multilingual Manual Pre-Launch QA Series (8 parts)
This series walks through the eight pre-launch checks a multilingual manual must pass, from translation intake to final release. Each part comes with a guide and a self-check checklist.
- Part 1 · Translation Integrity — Pre-edit defect screening of translated content
- Part 2 · DTP — Multilingual typesetting and layout integrity
- Part 3 · Regulatory — Market-specific regulatory and standards markings
- Part 4 · UI Matching — Aligning the product UI with the manual
- Part 5 · Accessibility — ADA, Section 508, WCAG, PDF/UA checks
- Part 6 · Multi-Channel Publishing — Cross-media consistency across PDF, HTML, and mobile from one source
- Part 7 · Print Production — Print-ready PDF: bleed, CMYK, font embedding
- Part 8 · Data Management — Archiving source files and translation memory for reuse
Hansem Global
Founded in 1990, Hansem Global specializes in multilingual technical documentation and localization for global manufacturers, operating a quality assurance system that spans the entire manual production process — from authoring and translation to digital and print publishing. www.hansem.com
This document does not replace the source standards or applicable law, nor does it provide legal advice. Confirm the current version of each standard and market-specific requirements before final release.