WCAG Compliant?

Thank you for your question. The code for the game was taken from the open-source project chromium, which is the backbone for browsers like Chrome and Edge. The code for the game itself is written in JavaScript, and the only real modifications to it were a few lines that were changed so that the game can run without relying on jQuery. Here’s a copy of the game code as it exists in the current version:
https://plugins.trac.www.ads-software.com/browser/dinosaur-game/tags/1.0.7/game-logic.js .

I don’t think the content of the game has ever gotten a professional WCAG audit, and that’s probably what would be required to answer with confidence to all the many requirements of WCAG 2.1. But the requirements of WCAG mostly fall into four main categories: (1) Perceivable, (2) Operable, (3) Understandable, and (4) Robust.

(1) Perceivable – this refers to the ways that users perceive content online through their senses of sight, sound, and touch. This includes issues like captions for videos, text that can be adjusted for contrast, color, text size and spacing, font, and similar factors that make it easier to read. Meeting this requirement in a game can be somewhat tricky, particularly given that WordPress sites can modify how they look so every implementation of this game is going to be a little different. That being said, the elements of this game are monochromatic and the background is semi-transparent. The main game sprites make use of high-contrast outlines. This all means site owners can use this game with any background color and the game will still be high contrast enough to see. I wrote a small demo for the plugin which demonstrates the effect at https://chrisdavidmiles.com/dinosaur-game .

(2) Operable – operability means the ways that someone can use the site. It’s particularly relevant to people with motor disabilities, weak muscles, injured limbs, etc. An operable site needs to be navigable entirely by keyboard, sight-assisted navigation, and other alternatives to a classic mouse. Sometimes this requirement is oversimplified into “can you operate the site without a mouse”. It’s a bit more complex than that, but the idea is that many assistive technologies come in the form of modified keyboards, so it’s a common shorthand. The dinosaur game is designed to be played with a single key on the keyboard. It works on every standard screen size including mobile screens and responds to touch inputs. This design choice is likely a result of it being designed for browsers on desktop and mobile as part of chromium.

(3) Understandable – understandable sites are easy for everyone to understand. They don’t use a lot of technical terms or complex jargon, don’t have complicated instructions that are difficult to follow, and have consistent directions that won’t confuse readers. This part is mostly up to the consumer of the plugin. There are no instructions for “how to play” included in the plugin short-code, and that’s by design. There’s really no need for translation, or localization if users have to write their own explainer text. It also makes it easy for site owners to make any explainer text they want, match the look and feel of their site. The game also works reasonably well without any explainer “how to play” text.

(4) Robust – there are two factors for a robust site: (a) Using clean HTML and CSS code that meets recognized standards. (b) Being compatible with assistive tools that people with disabilities use to browse online. This is where I expect a professional WCAG audit would probably do the most good. While the game does use semantic html and allows for the customization of tags if users want to add more, I’m not aware of any testing for compatibility with assistive technology.

If you’re generally looking to make a site that’s accessible to as many people as possible, I don’t see any problem with including a simple game like this as long as it’s included in a thoughtful way and other parts of the site follow best practices.

If your site has specific requirements to comply with a particular standard such as WCAG 2.1 ADA Title III, Section 508, IS5568, or others, I would suggest getting a professional audit done which can speak to the large number of specific requirements of that standard.

Thanks for the speedy response Chris ??

I just followed you on Twitter.

Wishing you and your family a year of good health and happiness.