WCAG 2.1 or 2.2: which version should our website target?

Target WCAG 2.2 at Level AA. Content that conforms to WCAG 2.2 also conforms to 2.1 and 2.0, so meeting 2.2 covers every law and contract that still names the older version, and it adds six Level A and AA requirements that fix real problems for keyboard, touch and cognitive-disability users. The W3C recommends the latest version, and WCAG 2.2 became the international standard ISO/IEC 40500:2025 in October 2025.

The one reason to stop at 2.1 is a contract or regulation that names 2.1 and a budget that cannot stretch further. Even then, the extra work for 2.2 is usually modest.

What is the difference between WCAG 2.1 and 2.2?

WCAG 2.2 was published by the W3C on 5 October 2023. It keeps the 2.1 success criteria, adds nine new ones and removes one. The specification says plainly: "Content that conforms to WCAG 2.2 also conforms to WCAG 2.0 and WCAG 2.1."

Of the nine new criteria, three are Level AAA, which few organisations target. The six that matter for a Level AA site are:

2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum), AA. When a link or button receives keyboard focus, it must not be entirely hidden by something the site put there. Sticky headers, cookie banners and chat bubbles are the usual culprits.
2.5.7 Dragging Movements, AA. Anything that works by dragging, such as a slider, a map or a sortable list, also needs a way to do it with single taps or clicks.
2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum), AA. Buttons and links need to be at least 24 by 24 CSS pixels, or have enough space around them, with some exceptions such as links inside a sentence.
3.2.6 Consistent Help, A. If you offer help, such as a phone number, a contact link or a chat, it has to appear in the same relative place on each page where it appears.
3.3.7 Redundant Entry, A. In a multi-step process, people should not have to type the same information twice. The site fills it in or lets them select it.
3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum), AA. Logging in cannot depend on a memory or puzzle test unless there is an alternative or help, for example by letting people paste passwords or use a password manager.

What was removed?

Success criterion 4.1.1 Parsing is obsolete and removed in WCAG 2.2. It dealt with malformed HTML, which modern browsers now handle in a consistent way. The W3C has also added a note to its WCAG 2.1 guidance saying the criterion should be considered always satisfied for content using HTML or XML. In practice, dropping it makes no difference to a site that meets 2.1.

Which version do the laws require?

The answer differs by country and by who you are. As of September 2026:

US state and local governments. The ADA Title II rule requires WCAG 2.1 Level AA. An April 2026 interim final rule moved the compliance dates to April 26, 2027 for entities serving 50,000 people or more, and April 26, 2028 for smaller entities and special districts.
US federal agencies. The Revised Section 508 Standards incorporate WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA.
US private businesses. No regulation names a version. The Department of Justice says businesses open to the public must make their websites accessible and have flexibility in how they do it, and points to WCAG as helpful guidance.
The EU. The European standard EN 301 549 is the reference for the European Accessibility Act and the Web Accessibility Directive. A new version, EN 301 549 v4.1.1, was published in September 2026 and adopts WCAG 2.2. According to the European Commission's AccessibleEU centre, the current reference remains v3.2.1, based on WCAG 2.1 Level AA, until the Commission cites the new version in the Official Journal.
UK public sector. Government guidance says public sector websites must meet the WCAG 2.2 AA standard.

Because 2.2 includes 2.1 and 2.0, a site built to 2.2 AA meets every one of these standards at once.

This is general information, not legal advice. If a specific law or contract applies to you, check its exact wording.

Why target 2.2 if our law only names 2.1?

A few practical reasons.

Standards move in one direction. The W3C encourages everyone to use the latest version when developing or updating policies. WCAG 2.2 is now an ISO standard, and the EU's reference standard has just been updated to it. A site built to 2.1 today is likely to face a second round of work within a few years.

Retrofitting costs more than building it in. Target size, focus visibility and login flows are design decisions. Getting them right in a redesign is cheap. Changing them after launch means reworking components that are already live.

The six new criteria also fix things users hit every day. A focused button hidden under a sticky header, a tiny close icon on a phone, or a password field that blocks paste are real barriers, whatever version your regulator names.

Our contract or RFP says WCAG 2.1. What should we do?

Meet the contract, and build to 2.2 where it costs little. Report conformance against 2.1 AA as the contract asks, and note separately which of the six 2.2 criteria are met. That keeps the paperwork accurate and leaves the site ready for the next version of the requirement.

If you are the one writing the contract or RFP, name WCAG 2.2 Level AA. It leaves no ambiguity and includes the older versions.

How much extra work is WCAG 2.2 on an existing site?

That depends on the site, and it is usually concentrated in a few places. Look at:

Sticky headers, footers, cookie banners and chat widgets that can cover focused elements.
Small icon buttons, especially on mobile: close buttons, carousel arrows, social icons.
Sliders, drag-and-drop uploads, sortable lists and map controls.
Checkout and sign-up flows that ask for the same address or details twice.
Login pages that block paste, rely on puzzle captchas or disable password managers.
Where the help link, phone number or chat button sits on different page templates.

Most of these fixes live in shared components, so one change often repairs the whole site.

Questions people also ask

Is WCAG 2.2 backwards compatible with 2.1?

Yes. The W3C says a page that meets 2.2 meets 2.1 and 2.0 as well. The only criterion removed, 4.1.1 Parsing, is one the W3C now treats as always satisfied for HTML.

Should we wait for WCAG 3?

No. WCAG 3 is still an early draft with no finished date, and no law requires it. WCAG 2.2 is the current standard.

Do we need to meet Level AAA?

None of the laws listed above requires Level AAA, and the W3C advises against requiring it as a general policy for whole sites, because some content cannot meet every AAA criterion. Some AAA criteria are worth adopting where they fit your audience.

Does the European Accessibility Act require WCAG 2.2?

The Act itself sets functional requirements and does not name a WCAG version. The harmonised standard it relies on is moving from WCAG 2.1 to 2.2, and until the new version is formally cited, AccessibleEU says the reference remains the WCAG 2.1 based version.