# Found and fixed 11 accessibility defects the browser reported as healthy — eight footer links still in tab order behind pointer‑events, a scroll timeline clipping the colophon off three pages, and a rule engine running 70 of its 105 rules. 2025 **Situation.** The site passed its automated accessibility rules. It also had eleven defects that those rules could not see, because each one was a property of how the page rendered rather than of what the markup said — the kind that a validator reports as healthy and a keyboard user hits within seconds. **Task.** The defects had to be found, fixed, and written up as a ledger with the rule each one produced, so the class of defect closes rather than the instance. **Action.** They fell into three groups. Sizing: a stylesheet keyword used as if it were relative pinned a whole region to sixteen pixels while the body ran up to twenty‑two; a subscript element was used to mean "smaller"; shrinking text lengthened a line until a title ran to ninety‑six characters; and a measured height cap was outgrown by the very text‑spacing override the site claims to support. Focus and clipping: eight footer links stayed in the tab order behind a property that removes pointer interaction and nothing else; an overflow rule created a scroll container nobody wanted; and a scroll‑driven animation, which is simply inactive on a page too short to scroll, permanently clipped the footer off three pages. And two defects in the guards themselves, which are the ones worth naming — every window shape the layout check opened was nine hundred pixels tall, so a landscape phone at 852 by 393 gave seven pixels between two items and no check had ever looked; and the rule engine had been running seventy of its hundred and five rules, so the rule that would have caught the missing landmark was not in the set. **Result.** Eleven defects fixed and, more usefully, four rules that outlive them: a guard that tests one axis defends one axis, a rule set that does not contain the rule cannot enforce it, height is a dimension so test it, and prove visibility in pixels rather than in the document. When the layout check was reopened properly it failed a hundred and twenty‑eight times across three languages, including a phone‑sized window where the hero's closing line sat twenty‑one pixels under the fold. --- - Role: Accessibility Specialist - Categories: [Frontend Engineering](https://engineer.company/categories/frontend/), [Web Development](https://engineer.company/categories/web-development/), [Automation & CI/CD](https://engineer.company/categories/automation/), [Testing & QA](https://engineer.company/categories/testing/), [Design Systems & UI](https://engineer.company/categories/design-systems/), [UX / UI Design](https://engineer.company/categories/ux-ui/) - Services: [Frontend Development](https://engineer.company/services/frontend-development/), [Website Development & CMS](https://engineer.company/services/web-development/), [UI/UX Design & Design Systems](https://engineer.company/services/ui-ux-design/)