Checklist
Give the colour a second way to speak
The meaning should survive when the colour does not.
When it fits
- Status, charts or errors rely on red, green or another colour code.
When to avoid it
- An unexplained icon can be as ambiguous as a colour. Do not assume that adding any symbol makes the information accessible.
Checklist
- Does each important state have information beyond its colour?
- Can a reader distinguish chart series without memorising a colour legend?
- Do error messages identify the problem rather than merely tinting a field?
Why it matters
Add a meaningful label, symbol, pattern or other non-colour cue. Keep that cue consistent and understandable in context. This addresses colour dependence; contrast, accessible names and text alternatives still need their own checks.
An example
A reconciliation table replaces red-only rows with an Error status and a short reason, while retaining colour as an optional aid.
Check your result
Can someone explain every important distinction without naming a colour?
Keep this limit in mind
- An unexplained icon can be as ambiguous as a colour. Do not assume that adding any symbol makes the information accessible.
Connected ideas
Useful withMake the error show the next repair
Evidence and sources
Supports
WCAG 1.4.1 does not allow colour to be the only visual means of conveying information, indicating an action or distinguishing an element.
A text label or pattern does not independently establish sufficient contrast or accessible naming.
Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.1: Use of Color · Success criterion and intent.