Editorial policy

Purpose of the content

The guides exist to help people test websites well, whether or not they ever hire us. They are written to be useful on their own: a reader should be able to follow a guide without buying anything. Where a service of ours is relevant, a guide may link to it, but the guide's advice does not depend on it.

Sources

• Primary sources first. Claims about standards, laws, regulators and products are checked against the primary source: the W3C for WCAG, the Irish Statute Book and the relevant regulator for Irish law, OWASP for the OWASP Top 10, vendor documentation for products, and so on.
• Labelled secondary sources. Where a primary source could not be read, or where a secondary source adds useful explanation, it is labelled "secondary source" in the source list.
• Labelled commercial sources. Prices and figures published by companies are labelled "commercial source", quoted as published, and never presented as a market average.
• Dates. Each source list states when its sources were read. Laws, standards and prices change; the date tells you how current the guide is.
• Exact wording. When a guide relies on the wording of a law or standard, it quotes the wording or follows it closely, rather than paraphrasing in a way that changes the meaning.

What we do not publish

• Invented results. No made-up statistics, case studies, testimonials, client names or performance figures. Examples that are invented to show a format are labelled as illustrative.
• Claims of testing we did not do. A guide does not say a tool or method was tested unless it was, and our reports do not claim coverage that was not part of the work.
• Generalisations dressed as facts. Where something depends on the site, the guide says so instead of claiming what "most" websites do without evidence.
• Legal advice. Guides explain why a rule matters for testing and link to the official source. Whether a rule applies to a particular organisation is a question for that organisation's adviser.

Money and influence

The site carries no advertising and no affiliate links. No platform, tool vendor or provider pays to be mentioned, and none has reviewed or approved any guide before publication. Our own commercial interest is described in the site footer.

Checking and updating

Each guide is checked against its sources before publication. When a cited source changes, such as a new version of a standard or a change in a regulator's guidance, the guide is revised and its "last updated" date moves. Minor edits that do not change meaning, such as fixing a typo or a broken link, do not change the date.

Corrections

Spotted an error? Send the page address and the point in question to hello@qaveridia.online, and the claim is checked against its source. If the guide is wrong, we fix it and update the date. Where a correction changes the substance of advice, the guide notes what changed.

Authorship

Guides are written by Samuel Price, the pen name of the site's editor. The author page explains why a pen name is used. The editor is accountable for everything published on the site.

Examples and illustrations

Guides use examples to show formats, such as a bug report, a test case or a defect list. Every example that is invented is labelled as illustrative, and invented examples use obviously fictional names, addresses and organisations. Where an example uses a real product, standard or service, it describes it accurately and links to the source. Screenshots and diagrams are either drawn for the site or taken from our own testing environment, never lifted from another website.

Product and platform names

Guides mention browsers, content management systems, testing tools and services by name when that helps the reader. A mention is not an endorsement, and no company has paid for or approved one. Product names are trademarks of their owners. Where a guide compares approaches, it describes trade-offs rather than declaring winners, because the right choice depends on the site.

Use of software tools in writing

Drafting and checking may involve software tools, such as spelling and grammar checkers or scripts that look for broken links and inconsistent terms. Every page is reviewed by the editor, who is responsible for its accuracy. Facts are checked against sources, not against the output of a tool.

Reviews of old content

Each guide is reviewed at least once a year, even if no source has changed, to check that its advice still reflects current practice. The review may confirm the guide as it stands, in which case only the review is noted internally, or it may lead to an update and a new date.

Feedback on the guides

Disagreement is welcome. If you think a guide gives poor advice, rather than wrong facts, write and say why. Testing practice varies, and a well-argued alternative can improve a guide even when the original was not wrong. Where we change a guide in response, we may mention the improvement on the page; we will not publish your name or message without your permission.

Accessibility of the content

Pages are written in plain English, with descriptive headings, meaningful link text and tables with headers. The accessibility statement records how the site has been checked and what is still to do.