English
a11yglass · Accessibility check for websites

Checked 8/31/2026 · https://github.com/?locale=de-de

B
86 / 100
0 critical · 2 to check

No critical barriers in the checked HTML · 2 pointe to follow up.

How is the score formed? (100 starting points)
{n} button(s) without a name in the HTML-7
{n} duplicate id attributes-7
Result86 / 100
ContrastText alternatives?Labelling (1)StructureLanguageZoom?Robustness (1)

Operable

To checkWCAG 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value

{n} button(s) without a name in the HTML

Buttons without text and without an aria-label are mute to screen readers — unless the name is set via JavaScript.

button

This is what you should do: Add button text or set an aria-label.

Robust

To checkWCAG 4.1.1 Parsing (deprecated, but still relevant for links)

{n} duplicate id attributes

e.g. {examples}. Breaks label-for and aria links.

[id]

This is what you should do: Assign unique ids.

Already handled correctly

Next steps

  1. {n} button(s) without a name in the HTML. Add button text or set an aria-label.
  2. {n} duplicate id attributes. Assign unique ids.
Monitor this page automatically?

Weekly re-scan, JS-rendered, email on new barriers — coming soon.

Create an accessibility statement →

Method & limits

On 8/31/2026 the HTML that github.com delivers on a first visit without login was checked, plus up to four linked CSS files from the same domain. Checked: colour contrast (from CSS), text alternatives, form labelling, names of controls, heading structure, page title and page language, zoom lock, duplicate ids, positive tabindex values, landmarks.

Not checked: anything that arises via JavaScript, keyboard operability, visible focus, focus order, screen-reader announcement, content behind login, subpages. The automated test finds roughly 20–35% of WCAG breaches — the rest needs a manual check. A snapshot, not a legal decision.

Check another website