WCAG vs BITV-test
TLDR
The WCAG resembles an encyclopedia, sacrificing ease of use for its information’s accuracy and completeness, while the BITV (which was created to have a standard test if websites conform to Germany’s accessibility requirements) is a lot more approachable.
It chooses to give a lot less information and also takes the risk of not always giving the best Accessibility requirements to facilitate its use. Indeed, WCAG specifies that it only gives recommendations because it knows it is difficult to keep pace with the newest technologies and fit the needs of every project.
At the same time, BITV does its best to give clear criteria, which you can either pass or fail since some projects are legally required to pass this test, and leaving some grey areas would make things difficult.
WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines)
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are a set of recommendations on accessibility. It’s the most recognized standard on how to create accessible digital experiences.
There are three WCAG levels of conformance: WCAG A (lowest), WCAG AA, and WCAG AAA (highest). Level AA has been recognized as the international standard because they are achievable without being too upsetting to the design and development process.
Although WCAG is often referred to as the gold standard in web accessibility, it is not a legal requirement that can be enforced. Fortunately, many governments have adopted it as the standard for their accessibility laws. Therefore, WCAG compliance means conformance with most international accessibility laws.
BITV-test
The BITV test was created to help determine whether a website conforms to the Barrierefreie Informationstechnik-Verordnung (Accessible Information Technology Regulation). It is now updated to follow the EU regulations on accessibility (which are based on the WCAG).
Websites of public services, in Germany, are legally required to fulfill the BITV test criteria to make sure they are accessible. Their official website has been partially translated into English, but the full version is only accessible in German.
Similarities
Since the BITV test was based on the WCAG guidelines, some resemblance will be easy to spot. For example, the success criteria have similar names and descriptions.
The BITV also adapts to changes made to the WCAG, as mentioned in this article. It explains which changes were made to the BITV, following the release of the WCAG 2.2 standard.
Differences
Updates
The BITV Test, being a legal requirement, evolves at the same speed as the European legislation, which means, slowly. For example, adapting the law to the new WCAG 2.2 standard is planned for the end of 2025 / beginning of 2026, so 2 years after the changes were made. It needs to be made clear how long will be needed to update the BITV Test, after that. It is therefore important to consult the WCAG to be aware of the latest findings in accessibility.
Recommendation levels
The WCAG divides its recommendations into 3 levels (A, AA, and AAA). This creates a hierarchy of importance for the recommendations. A shows the most basic requirements, AA provides a higher degree of accessibility and is often considered the standard for most websites while AAA refers to the most advanced Accessibility needs, and imposes a lot of limitations on the concept and design. On the other hand, the BITV test does not divide its recommendations, since all of its criteria are mandatory. If even just one criteria fails on a page of the website, the entire test was failed.
Clearer website structure
The BITV website has a much simpler structure due to the simple fact that its website has a lot less content. It’s easy to get lost in the WCAG website, which can make it intimidating to beginners. It’s hard to get a sense of whether you went through all the content that is relevant to what you were looking for since there are so many links inside of links inside of subpages…
Clearer requirements
The BITV, as a legal requirement, needs to stay realistic. To do so, it gives a list of less than 100 criteria. It also gives a detailed description of the requirement nature, why it is needed, and how it will be tested (including which browser version and which extensions will be used for it). Those specific criteria are what allow its simplicity: it does not try to give a perfect requirement description, just one that can be tested easily.
Since all its criteria are mandatory, and the BITV test is based on the WCAG, it would be easy to jump to the conclusion that the BITV is just a copy-paste of the WCAG A-Level recommendations. This is not the case. It was made by a team of experts who worked on the test to give the simplest version of what they believe will give a great user experience while following European law. The WCAG was used as a basis because the quality of their recommendations is internationally acknowledged.
Public test results
The BITV test has a page dedicated to the public record of test results. It shows which page of the websites were tested, and if they succeeded or failed the criteria. This can be useful if you’re looking for agencies with experience in developing websites following its standards or if you want to look at some examples.
Conclusion
The WCAG and the BITV were created for different purposes and it’s very clear to see if we spend a bit of time on their respective websites. The WCAG website is huge, which makes it easy to get overwhelmed.
We can see that it’s trying to cover every use case, including those that are obsolete (for example, it gives information on how to create accessible content Microsoft Silverlight, while specifying that it is no longer relevant since Microsoft stopped maintaining it). It is that way since WCAG aims to be backward compatible. Information does not get deleted, or updated, it gets added.
It’s also clear that they choose to give more information, rather than too little since they specify on their website that they’re not expecting digital experiences to follow all of their recommendations.
It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA Success Criteria for some content.
The BITV test, on the other hand, focuses on giving a realistic list of criteria, that people can go through to determine if their website can be considered as accessible or not.
I find it less overwhelming, and If you can speak German fluently, or do not mind reading the automatically translated version of the website, I would recommend starting with the BITV website and moving on to the WCAG afterward.