We want everyone who visits the onsemi website to feel welcome and find the experience rewarding.

What are we doing?

To help us make the onsemi website a positive place for everyone, we've been using the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. These guidelines explain how to make web content more accessible for people with disabilities, and user friendly for everyone.

The guidelines have three levels of accessibility (A, AA and AAA). We’ve chosen Level A as the target for the onsemi website.

How are we doing?

We're working hard to achieve our goal of Level A accessibility, but we realize there are some areas that still need improving. The following explains what we're doing to make that happen.

1.1.1 Non-text Content: Is there an alternative for all 'non-text' content?

The intent of this Success Criterion is to make information conveyed by non-text content accessible through the use of a text alternative. Text alternatives are a primary way for making information accessible because they can be rendered through any sensory modality (for example, visual, auditory or tactile) to match the needs of the user. Providing text alternatives allows the information to be rendered in a variety of ways by a variety of user agents. For example, a person who cannot see a picture can have the text alternative read aloud using synthesized speech. A person who cannot hear an audio file can have the text alternative displayed so that he or she can read it. In the future, text alternatives will also allow information to be more easily translated into sign language or into a simpler form of the same language.

1.2.1 Audio-only and video-only (Prerecorded): Have you provided alternatives for time-based media?

The intent of this Success Criterion is to make information conveyed by prerecorded audio-only and prerecorded video-only content available to all users. Alternatives for time-based media that are text based make information accessible because text can be rendered through any sensory modality (for example, visual, auditory or tactile) to match the needs of the user. In the future, text could also be translated into symbols, sign language or simpler forms of the language (future).

1.2.2 Captions (Prerecorded): Have you provided captions for all prerecorded audio content?

The intent of this Success Criterion is to enable people who are deaf or hard of hearing to watch synchronized media presentations. Captions provide the part of the content available via the audio track. Captions not only include dialogue, but identify who is speaking and include non-speech information conveyed through sound, including meaningful sound effects.

1.2.3 Audio Description or Media Alternative (Prerecorded): Have you provided an audio description or media alternative for video content?

The intent of this Success Criterion is to provide people who are blind or visually impaired access to the visual information in a synchronized media presentation. This Success Criterion describes two approaches, either of which can be used.

One approach is to provide audio description of the video content. The audio description augments the audio portion of the presentation with the information needed when the video portion is not available. During existing pauses in dialogue, audio description provides information about actions, characters, scene changes, and on-screen text that are important and are not described or spoken in the main sound track.

The second approach involves providing all of the information in the synchronized media (both visual and auditory) in text form. An alternative for time-based media provides a running description of all that is going on in the synchronized media content. The alternative for time-based media reads something like a screenplay or book. Unlike audio description, the description of the video portion is not constrained to just the pauses in the existing dialogue. Full descriptions are provided of all visual information, including visual context, actions and expressions of actors, and any other visual material. In addition, non-speech sounds (laughter, off-screen voices, etc.) are described, and transcripts of all dialogue are included. The sequence of description and dialogue transcripts are the same as the sequence in the synchronized media itself. As a result, the alternative for time-based media can provide a much more complete representation of the synchronized media content than audio description alone.

2.1.1 Keyboard: Is all content and functionality operable through a keyboard?

The intent of this Success Criterion is to ensure that, wherever possible, content can be operated through a keyboard or keyboard interface (so an alternate keyboard can be used). When content can be operated through a keyboard or alternate keyboard, it is operable by people with no vision (who cannot use devices such as mice that require eye-hand coordination) as well as by people who must use alternate keyboards or input devices that act as keyboard emulators. Keyboard emulators include speech input software, sip-and-puff software, on-screen keyboards, scanning software and a variety of assistive technologies and alternate keyboards. Individuals with low vision also may have trouble tracking a pointer and find the use of software much easier (or only possible) if they can control it from the keyboard.

2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap: Is it possible to move keyboard focus away from all components that can receive it?

The intent of this Success Criterion is to ensure that that content does not "trap" keyboard focus within subsections of content on a Web page. This is a common problem when multiple formats are combined within a page and rendered using plug-ins or embedded applications.

There may be times when the functionality of the Web page restricts the focus to a subsection of the content, as long as the user knows how to leave that state and "untrap" the focus.

2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation: Are events triggered by clicks and taps using the 'up' event?

The intent of this success criterion is to make it easier for users to prevent accidental or erroneous pointer input. People with various disabilities can inadvertently initiate touch or mouse events with unwanted results. Each of the following subsections roughly aligns with the bullets of this Success Criterion, and outlines a means of allowing users to cancel pointer operations.

Ensuring that drag-and-drop actions can be cancelled.

The Technique is applicable to any technology that supports pointer input (e.g. supporting any or all of the following: mouse pointer, touch on touch screen or trackpad, stylus input, or laser pointer input).

The objective of this technique is to ensure that users who use a path-based drag-and-drop action to move an item from the initial location to a drop target can abort the action after picking up the target. This can be done either by releasing the item outside a drop area, or by moving the item back to its original position in a separate action that undoes the first action. A third option is to have a step after the element is dropped onto target, either with a dialog asking for confirmation of the action when the item is dropped, or providing an undo command.

4.1.1 Parsing: Do all pages validate to W3C specifications?

In content implemented using markup languages, elements have complete start and end tags, elements are nested according to their specifications, elements do not contain duplicate attributes, and any IDs are unique, except where the specifications allow these features.

Ensuring that Web pages have complete start and end tags and are nested according to specification helps ensure that assistive technologies can parse the content accurately and without crashing.

Let us know what you think

If you enjoyed using the onsemi website, or if you had trouble with any part of it, please get in touch. We'd like to hear from you in the following way:

This accessibility statement was generated on 2nd July 2021 using the Accessibility Statement Generator, built by Nomensa.