WAS logo
Focused certification exam prep
Start practice

WCAG 2.2 Practice Questions: 30 Questions with Detailed Explanations

TL;DR
  • If you are preparing for the Web Accessibility Specialist (WAS) certification from the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP)...
  • WCAG 2.2, published by the W3C in October 2023, builds on WCAG 2.1 and adds nine new success criteria.
  • The Perceivable principle ensures that all information and UI components can be perceived by users, regardless of their sensory abilities.
  • Operability ensures that all users can navigate and use interface components.

Introduction: Why WCAG 2.2 Matters for the WAS Exam

If you are preparing for the Web Accessibility Specialist (WAS) certification from the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP), mastering WCAG 2.2 is non-negotiable. The October 2024 Body of Knowledge places WCAG 2.2 squarely within Domain 1: Creating Accessible Web Solutions, which accounts for 40% of your exam score. But WCAG knowledge bleeds into Domain 2 as well - you cannot evaluate conformance without knowing the standard cold.

This article gives you 30 WCAG 2.2 practice questions modeled on the style, depth, and complexity of real web accessibility specialist exam questions. Each question comes with a detailed explanation so you understand not just the right answer, but why it is correct - exactly the kind of reasoning the IAAP WAS exam rewards.

💡 How to Use This Article

Work through each question independently before reading the explanation. Track how many you get right per principle (Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, Robust). This will reveal where your knowledge gaps are and guide the rest of your WAS exam prep. Aim for 80%+ in each section before exam day.

If you want unlimited randomized questions beyond these 30, head to our WAS practice test platform where you can simulate a full timed exam session. And if you are still deciding whether to sit the WAS or start with CPACC, our comparison article on WAS vs CPACC: Which IAAP Accessibility Certification First? will help you choose the right path.

WCAG 2.2 at a Glance: What You Need to Know

WCAG 2.2, published by the W3C in October 2023, builds on WCAG 2.1 and adds nine new success criteria. It is organized around four principles - Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust (POUR) - with three conformance levels: A, AA, and AAA. The IAAP WAS exam focuses most heavily on Level A and AA criteria, though AAA criteria may appear in context.

4
POUR Principles
78
Total Success Criteria
9
New in WCAG 2.2
3
Conformance Levels

Key WCAG 2.2 additions that frequently appear in WAS certification practice questions include:

  • 2.4.11 Focus Appearance (AA) - Minimum visibility for keyboard focus indicators
  • 2.4.12 Focus Appearance (AAA) - Enhanced focus visibility requirements
  • 2.5.7 Dragging Movements (AA) - Alternative to drag-and-drop interactions
  • 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) (AA) - 24×24 CSS pixel minimum for interactive targets
  • 3.2.6 Consistent Help (A) - Help mechanisms must appear in a consistent location
  • 3.3.7 Redundant Entry (A) - Users should not need to re-enter information already provided
  • 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum) (AA) - No cognitive function tests required to log in
  • 3.3.9 Accessible Authentication (Enhanced) (AAA) - Stricter authentication rules

For a structured study plan covering WCAG and all other domains, see our WAS Exam Study Guide: How to Prepare in 40-80 Hours.

Questions 1-8: Perceivable Principle

The Perceivable principle ensures that all information and UI components can be perceived by users, regardless of their sensory abilities. These questions cover text alternatives, time-based media, adaptable content, and distinguishable presentation.

Q1
An image of a company logo contains the text "AcmeCorp - Innovating Since 1990." The image has alt="logo." Which WCAG 2.2 criterion is violated?

Answer: 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A). The alt text must convey the same information as the image. Since the logo contains meaningful text, the alt attribute should read something like "AcmeCorp - Innovating Since 1990" - not simply "logo," which is non-descriptive and loses the informational content.

Q2
A decorative divider image has no alt attribute at all. Is this a WCAG violation?

Answer: No - provided the image is truly decorative. Decorative images should have an empty alt attribute (alt="") so screen readers ignore them. Omitting the alt attribute entirely is different from providing an empty one; some assistive technologies will announce the file name if alt is absent, which can be disorienting. Best practice is always to include alt="" for decorative images.

Q3
A live news stream has auto-generated captions that are 70% accurate. Does this meet 1.2.4 Captions (Live) at Level AA?

Answer: No. WCAG 1.2.4 requires captions for all live audio content in synchronized media. While the criterion does not specify a numeric accuracy threshold, captions must be "equivalent" to the live audio. 70% accuracy is generally insufficient to be considered equivalent - key information, names, and context will routinely be lost.

Q4
Text and its background have a contrast ratio of 3.5:1. The text is 18pt bold. Does this meet 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum)?

Answer: Yes. WCAG 1.4.3 requires a minimum contrast ratio of 4.5:1 for normal text, but only 3:1 for large text. Large text is defined as at least 18pt (24px) regular weight, or 14pt (approximately 18.67px) bold. Since 18pt bold qualifies as large text, the 3.5:1 ratio exceeds the 3:1 threshold and passes.

Q5
A page layout breaks completely when a user zooms to 400%. Which criterion addresses this?

Answer: 1.4.10 Reflow (Level AA). Content must reflow into a single column at 320 CSS pixels wide (equivalent to 400% zoom on a 1280px viewport) without requiring horizontal scrolling for reading, except for content that requires two-dimensional layout by nature (e.g., maps, data tables).

Q6
A designer sets body text color using CSS but relies on the browser default for background color. What WCAG risk does this create?

Answer: A 1.4.3 Contrast failure risk. When the foreground color is set in CSS but background color is left to browser defaults, users who have customized their browser's default background may experience very low contrast. Criterion 1.4.3 applies to author-specified text. Best practice is to always specify both foreground and background colors together.

Q7
An infographic conveying complex statistical data has a long description linked via a separate page. Does this satisfy 1.1.1?

Answer: Yes, if implemented correctly. WCAG 1.1.1 requires a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose. A long description on a separate page is one acceptable technique (Technique G73), provided the image's short alt text indicates where the long description can be found and the link to it is clearly accessible.

Q8
Which criterion requires that content does not rely solely on color to convey information?

Answer: 1.4.1 Use of Color (Level A). Color alone cannot be used as the only visual means of conveying information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or distinguishing a visual element. A common failure is a form validation that turns a border red without any other indicator (icon, text, pattern) of the error state.

Questions 9-16: Operable Principle

Operability ensures that all users can navigate and use interface components. This principle is especially tested in the context of keyboard access, timing, seizures, and navigation - topics that are heavily weighted in both Domain 1 and Domain 2 of the IAAP WAS exam.

⚠️ High-Frequency Exam Area

Keyboard accessibility and focus management questions are among the most common on the WAS exam. Make sure you can distinguish between 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.4 without hesitation. For dedicated practice in this area, see our article on Keyboard Accessibility and Screen Reader Questions for the WAS Exam.

Q9
A modal dialog opens and focus is not moved into it. Pressing Tab cycles through background content. Which criterion is violated?

Answer: 2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap (Level A). While 2.1.2 technically prevents keyboard focus from being trapped, this scenario also violates the intent of 2.1.1 Keyboard since the modal is inoperable by keyboard in a meaningful way. In practice, focus management in modals is a failure of 2.1.1 - the modal itself cannot be operated because focus remains in the background. Proper implementation requires moving focus into the modal and containing it there until dismissed.

Q10
A single-key shortcut "S" triggers a search. A keyboard-only user accidentally activates it while typing in a text field. Which WCAG 2.1/2.2 criterion applies?

Answer: 2.1.4 Character Key Shortcuts (Level A). Single-character keyboard shortcuts can conflict with AT commands and cause accidental activation. WCAG requires that such shortcuts can be turned off, remapped, or only activate when the relevant component has focus.

Q11
A page auto-refreshes every 30 seconds with no warning and no way to stop it. Which criteria are violated?

Answer: 2.2.1 Timing Adjustable (Level A). Users must be able to turn off, adjust, or extend time limits. An auto-refresh with no user control violates this criterion. It may also implicate 2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide if the refresh creates moving or updating content that distracts users.

Q12
A website has a carousel that flashes at 4 Hz. Which criterion is this most likely to violate?

Answer: 2.3.1 Three Flashes or Below Threshold (Level A). Content must not flash more than three times per second, unless the flash is below the general flash and red flash thresholds. A 4 Hz flash rate exceeds the safe threshold and can trigger photosensitive seizures.

Q13
A site provides a skip navigation link, but it is visually hidden and never receives focus. Is this sufficient for 2.4.1?

Answer: No. A skip link that is hidden and never focusable does not satisfy 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (Level A). The link must be reachable by keyboard. A common acceptable approach is to make it visible on focus (using CSS :focus styles) so sighted keyboard users can also use it.

Q14
A button's accessible name is "Click here." Is this sufficient under WCAG 2.2?

Answer: Generally no. Criterion 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (AA) and 2.4.9 Link Purpose (Link Only) (AAA) address this, but most directly, 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (AA) requires that the purpose of each link or button can be determined from the text alone or from context. "Click here" provides no programmatic or contextual meaning for assistive technology users navigating by links or buttons.

Q15
New in WCAG 2.2: A drag-and-drop interface for reordering list items has no alternative mechanism. Which criterion does this violate?

Answer: 2.5.7 Dragging Movements (Level AA). All functionality that uses a dragging movement must be operable with a single pointer without dragging, unless dragging is essential. A common alternative is up/down arrow buttons or a cut-and-paste list reordering mechanism.

Q16
An interactive icon button is 20×20 CSS pixels with no additional spacing around it. Does this meet 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum)?

Answer: No. WCAG 2.2's new 2.5.8 (Level AA) requires that the target size is at least 24×24 CSS pixels, or that the offset (spacing) between it and adjacent targets is sufficient to bring the total spacing to 24px. A 20×20 pixel target with no offset fails this criterion unless an exception applies (e.g., the target size is determined by the user agent and not modified by the author, or the spacing compensates).

Questions 17-22: Understandable Principle

The Understandable principle covers readable content, predictable behavior, and input assistance. Several WCAG 2.2 additions fall here, making it a particularly rich area for was certification practice questions.

Q17
A form has no visible error messages; instead, the page title changes to "Error" when submission fails. Does this satisfy 3.3.1 Error Identification?

Answer: Partially, but likely insufficient. 3.3.1 (Level A) requires that if an input error is detected, the item in error is identified and the error is described to the user in text. Changing only the page title does not identify the specific field in error or describe the nature of the mistake. Errors must be associated with the specific input fields and communicated in text.

Q18
A site's navigation menu is in a different location on the checkout page than on all other pages. Which criterion is violated?

Answer: 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation (Level AA). Navigational mechanisms that are repeated on multiple pages must appear in the same relative order each time they are repeated, unless a change is initiated by the user.

Q19
New in WCAG 2.2: A multi-step form asks users to re-enter their email address on step 4, even though they provided it on step 1. Which criterion is violated?

Answer: 3.3.7 Redundant Entry (Level A). This new WCAG 2.2 criterion requires that information previously entered by or provided to the user that is required again in the same process is either auto-populated or available for the user to select, reducing cognitive burden especially for users with cognitive disabilities.

Q20
A login page requires users to solve a math puzzle as part of CAPTCHA. Is this compliant with WCAG 2.2?

Answer: No - it violates 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum) (Level AA). This new criterion prohibits cognitive function tests (such as math puzzles, memory tasks, or transcribing characters) as a required step in authentication, unless an alternative method is available, or a mechanism exists to assist completion. Providing a copy/paste option or password manager support are acceptable alternatives.

Q21
A form field labeled "DOB" accepts dates but provides no format hint. What criterion does this affect?

Answer: 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (Level A). When user input is required in a specific format, labels or instructions must be provided. "DOB" without a format hint (e.g., MM/DD/YYYY) fails to provide sufficient instruction and will likely cause errors - also implicating 3.3.1 Error Identification if errors result.

Q22
A help chat widget appears in the bottom-right corner on the homepage, but moves to the top-left on the contact page. Which WCAG 2.2 criterion does this violate?

Answer: 3.2.6 Consistent Help (Level A). This is a new WCAG 2.2 criterion. If a help mechanism (human contact, chat, FAQ link) is repeated across multiple pages, it must appear in the same relative order within the page. Moving it to a different location across pages creates inconsistency that is especially disorienting for users with cognitive disabilities.

Questions 23-28: Robust Principle

Robustness ensures content can be reliably interpreted by assistive technologies. This principle maps closely to WAI-ARIA usage, semantic HTML, and name/role/value - all core topics on the IAAP WAS practice exam. For deeper ARIA practice, see our dedicated article on ARIA Roles and Attributes: WAS Exam Practice Questions.

Q23
A developer uses a <div> with an onclick handler as a button, but adds no role or keyboard support. Which criterion is violated?

Answer: 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (Level A). All user interface components must have a name and role that can be programmatically determined. A plain <div> has no implicit button role, no keyboard interaction (Enter/Space), and no accessible name - failing 4.1.2 comprehensively. The fix is to use <button> or add role="button", tabindex="0", and keyboard event handling.

Q24
An ARIA live region is set to aria-live="assertive" for a status message about a background save. Is this appropriate?

Answer: No. aria-live="assertive" interrupts the user immediately, which is appropriate for critical time-sensitive alerts. A background save status is non-urgent and should use aria-live="polite", which announces the message at the next natural pause in the screen reader's speech output. Overuse of "assertive" disrupts reading flow and frustrates users.

Q25
An accordion component uses aria-expanded="false" but the panel content remains visible in the DOM and on screen. Is this a failure?

Answer: Yes - it is a mismatch between the programmatic state and the visual state. 4.1.2 requires that the state of components can be programmatically determined and that it matches the actual state. If content is visually visible, aria-expanded="false" communicates incorrect information to assistive technology users. The state attribute must match the actual UI state.

Q26
A page uses duplicate id attributes on two form fields. Why is this a problem under WCAG?

Answer: It violates 4.1.1 Parsing (Level A) in WCAG 2.1, and affects robust AT interpretation. Note: In WCAG 2.2, 4.1.1 is still present but its failure conditions have been clarified. Duplicate IDs cause issues when labels reference inputs via the for/id relationship - only the first matching ID is honored by most browsers, meaning one of the fields will have no programmatic label association, failing 1.3.1 and 4.1.2.

Q27
A status message saying "Your item was added to the cart" appears visually but is not announced by screen readers. Which criterion is violated?

Answer: 4.1.3 Status Messages (Level AA). Introduced in WCAG 2.1, this criterion requires that status messages that are not given focus can be programmatically determined (e.g., via role="status", role="alert", or an aria-live region) so that assistive technologies can convey them to users without requiring focus to be moved to the message.

Q28
A tab widget uses role="tablist", role="tab", and role="tabpanel" correctly, but does not implement aria-selected on the active tab. Is this complete?

Answer: No. While the structure is correct, aria-selected is a required state for role="tab". Without it, screen reader users cannot determine which tab is currently active. The active tab should have aria-selected="true" and inactive tabs should have aria-selected="false" (not just the absence of the attribute).

Questions 29-30: New WCAG 2.2 Success Criteria in Focus

Q29
A site's focus indicator is a 1px dotted outline that appears only on light gray backgrounds with no color change. Does this meet 2.4.11 Focus Appearance (Level AA)?

Answer: No. WCAG 2.2's 2.4.11 requires that the keyboard focus indicator: (1) encloses the focused component or subcomponent, (2) has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 between focused and unfocused states, and (3) has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against adjacent colors. A 1px dotted outline on a similar gray background will almost certainly fail the contrast requirements.

Q30
Which of the following best describes the exception clause in 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum)? A) Touch-only devices are exempt. B) Targets whose size is controlled by the user agent are exempt. C) Targets inside navigation bars are exempt. D) All targets under 44×44px are exempt.

Answer: B. 2.5.8 includes an exception for targets whose size is determined solely by the user agent and not modified by the author (e.g., native browser UI). It also excepts inline targets (where changing size would disrupt text flow) and targets where the spacing between them achieves a total of 24×24px. Options A, C, and D are not stated exceptions in WCAG 2.2.

✅ How Did You Score?

25-30 correct: Excellent - your WCAG 2.2 knowledge is exam-ready. Focus remaining prep on Domain 2 testing methodology. 18-24 correct: Good foundation. Review the principles where you missed questions and drill the new WCAG 2.2 criteria. Below 18: More focused study is needed. Work through the official WCAG 2.2 documentation and supplement with structured practice. Visit our WAS practice test platform for hundreds more questions.

Scoring Yourself and Next Steps

A strong performance on these 30 questions is encouraging, but the real IAAP WAS practice exam is broader and more nuanced. The WAS exam draws from WCAG 2.2, WAI-ARIA, ATAG, EN 301 549, accessible JavaScript patterns, assistive technology behavior, and accessibility testing methodology - all within a 180-minute, 175-question format.

WCAG PrincipleQuestions in This SetExam Weight (Approximate)
Perceivable8High - 1.1.1, 1.3.x, 1.4.x frequently tested
Operable8Very High - keyboard, focus, timing, new 2.2 criteria
Understandable6Medium-High - especially new 3.2.6, 3.3.7, 3.3.8
Robust6High - ARIA, semantic HTML, 4.1.2, 4.1.3
WCAG 2.2 Specific2 dedicatedGrowing - new criteria now in scope

Beyond WCAG, Domain 2 of the WAS exam - which makes up 60% of your score - tests your ability to apply evaluation methodology, use assistive technologies for testing, write accessibility audit reports, and recommend remediation strategies. For practice in this area, explore our article on Accessibility Testing Methodology: WAS Practice Questions.

💡 The WCAG-to-Testing Connection

Understanding WCAG 2.2 deeply is essential for Domain 2 as well as Domain 1. When you evaluate a site, every finding maps to a specific success criterion. You need to know the criterion number, level, and principle to write a credible audit report - which is exactly what real-world web accessibility specialists do daily. The surge in demand driven by the European Accessibility Act (EAA) 2025 means this knowledge is increasingly commercially valuable.

If you are building your study plan from scratch, the WAS Certification Exam Guide: Format, Topics, Pass Rate and Tips is the best starting point. It covers everything from registration to exam strategy. And if you want broader free practice beyond this article, try the WAS Practice Test: Free Web Accessibility Specialist Questions 2026 for a full-length simulated session.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many WCAG 2.2 questions are on the actual WAS exam?

The IAAP does not publish an exact breakdown of question distribution by topic, but WCAG 2.2 is the foundational standard for Domain 1 and underlies much of Domain 2. Based on the Body of Knowledge and community reports, you can expect WCAG knowledge to be directly or indirectly tested in 40-60% of the 175 exam questions. New WCAG 2.2 criteria (the nine additions) are explicitly in scope since the October 2024 update.

What is the WAS certification pass rate?

The IAAP does not publicly publish the WAS certification pass rate. Community estimates and exam prep providers suggest a pass rate in the range of 60-70% for first-time candidates. The exam is considered technically rigorous - significantly more so than CPACC - because it requires applied knowledge of implementation, testing tools, and assistive technology behavior in addition to standards knowledge. Structured practice and hands-on testing experience meaningfully improve your odds.

Should I memorize every WCAG success criterion number?

You do not need to memorize the text of every criterion verbatim, but you should absolutely know the criterion numbers, levels, and principles for all Level A and AA criteria, as well as the key AAA criteria that frequently appear in context. The exam will often describe a scenario and ask which criterion applies - without giving you the criterion name. Strong number-to-concept fluency is a real exam advantage.

What is the difference between WCAG 2.1 and WCAG 2.2 for the WAS exam?

WCAG 2.2 adds nine new success criteria to WCAG 2.1 (and removes 4.1.1 Parsing from the conformance requirements in practice). The new criteria include 2.4.11, 2.4.12, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.2.6, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, and 3.3.9. Since the October 2024 Body of Knowledge update, the IAAP WAS exam specifically references WCAG 2.2. You should study all criteria up to and including the WCAG 2.2 additions, and be able to distinguish which criteria are new versus carried over from earlier versions.

How does WAS exam difficulty compare to CPACC?

The WAS exam difficulty is substantially higher than CPACC. CPACC is a foundational certification testing conceptual knowledge of disability models, laws, and accessibility principles. WAS is a technical specialist credential requiring hands-on knowledge of coding, testing methodologies, assistive technologies, ARIA, and standards implementation. Most candidates who take both recommend earning CPACC first. See our full comparison in WAS vs CPACC: Which IAAP Accessibility Certification First? and the progression guide at From CPACC to WAS: Your Complete IAAP Certification Pathway.

Ready to Start Practicing?

These 30 questions are just the beginning. Our full WAS practice test platform offers hundreds of scenario-based questions across all exam domains - WCAG 2.2, WAI-ARIA, testing methodology, assistive technology, and more. Each question comes with a detailed explanation to build the deep understanding the IAAP WAS exam demands. Start your free session now and find out exactly where you stand.

Start Free Practice Test →

Ready to pass your WAS exam?

Put this into practice with free WAS questions across every exam domain.