ACT Rule 5effbb · proposed
Link in context is descriptive
Link Purpose at Level A lets a link lean on its surroundings, so "read more" can be acceptable when the sentence around it says what you are reading more of. This rule checks the link's name together with that context.
A tool can decide this one on its own, which is why it turns up in scanner output. The rule is proposed, so it has not yet been implemented in full by a tool and reviewed by a W3C working group, and the wording can still change.
What passing this rule proves
When this rule fails, 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) is not satisfied, and that half is certain. When it passes, W3C's own outcome mapping says the criterion still needs further testing. So a green result here is evidence that one specific thing is not broken, and it is the answer W3C gives on 59 of its 87 live rules.
Judging whether a purpose is clear is a reading job, which is why the implementations here are mostly manual or semi-automated. W3C lists 2.4.9 as the stricter sibling, because that one takes the context away and asks whether the link text stands up alone.
The criteria this rule is a test for
These are the criteria the rule names as its own conformance requirement. Each one is a far bigger question than this rule asks, and our page for it sets out what the whole criterion covers.
- 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) Level A
Criteria that are related but not tested here
W3C calls these secondary requirements. The rule correlates with them and was not designed to test them, so each one is either stricter than the rule or can be satisfied in ways the rule never looks at.
- 2.4.9 Link Purpose (Link Only) Level AAA
The normative rule text lives at W3C
What the rule applies to, and exactly what it expects, is published by W3C and can change. We link to it rather than restate it, so nothing here can quietly fall out of date against the source. Read rule 5effbb at W3C.
Text that exists is not the same as text that means something
Some rules go past whether text exists and ask whether it says anything. A heading called Section 2, a link called read more, a label called field. Each one is filled in and each one is empty of meaning.
This matters most to people who navigate by jumping. Screen reader users pull up a list of the links or headings on a page and read that list on its own, with no surrounding text to understand it by.
Repeated link text is the clearest case. Five links all reading read more are indistinguishable in a list. However clear they look beside their paragraphs, the list alone reveals they are all the same.
Fixes that satisfy it
If this rule fails on your site, these are the techniques that put it right.
Other rules W3C files under the same criteria
Each of these asks a different question about the same part of the standard. Passing all of them is still not the same as satisfying the criterion.
- Link has non-empty accessible name A tool can check this
- Links with identical accessible names and same context serve equivalent purpose A tool finds candidates, you decide
- Link is descriptive A tool can check this
- Links with identical accessible names have equivalent purpose A tool can check this
All 87 ACT rules are grouped by the criteria they test, and 24 of them decide nothing about WCAG on their own. Run a free scan to see which of these your own pages trip.