# Show HN: AriaWAI Paste this into the Hacker News submission form. Tone is calm, technical, not promotional. HN downvotes anything that smells like marketing copy. --- ## Title (80 chars max) > Show HN: AriaWAI – an accessibility widget that does not claim to deliver compliance (83 chars. If too long, drop "to deliver" → 80 chars.) Backup title: "Show HN: An honest accessibility overlay widget" --- ## URL > https://ariawai.com --- ## Text body (only fills if you do not link a URL, but include it anyway in the first comment) The web accessibility overlay market has a problem. The dominant vendors charge several hundred dollars a month and have built their marketing around the claim that adding their JavaScript snippet makes a website ADA and WCAG compliant. The FTC settled with AccessiBe for $1 million in January 2024 over exactly this claim. The accessibility community has documented the failure modes of overlay widgets for a decade. The category still grows. I built AriaWAI as a deliberate counter-position. It is the same kind of product, a script tag that loads a floating toolbar with font size, contrast, dyslexia font, text-to-speech, and similar controls, paired with a built-in automated WCAG scanner that flags real markup issues. The marketing position is the difference: AriaWAI never says it delivers compliance, because no overlay can. The homepage says this in the hero. The FAQ says it directly. The pricing page is built around the assumption that buyers want an honest comfort-layer product, not a compliance shortcut. Some technical notes that might interest this audience: - The widget bundle is roughly 18 KB gzipped, vanilla JS, no React or framework runtime - Installs with a single script tag on Wix, WordPress, Webflow, Shopify, plain HTML - Licence verification is fail-open by design. If our API is unreachable, the toolbar still loads and end users are not blocked - Telemetry is anonymous and aggregate. SHA-256 session hash that rotates daily, no persistent cookies, no fingerprinting, no IP storage - Self-hosted Supabase on a dedicated server in Germany, no third-party tracking - Pricing: free for one site forever, £29/mo white-labelled, £299/mo agency tier for 25 sites What I would value feedback on: - The honest-positioning copy. Is the homepage clear, or does it read as defensive? - The scan report ergonomics. Does the severity ranking and linked guidance make the next step obvious? - The fail-open licence verification approach. Is there a security argument against it I have not thought about? Happy to answer any technical, accessibility, business-model, or design questions. --- ## Best time to post Tuesday or Wednesday, 8 to 10 AM Pacific. Avoid Mondays (HN traffic is heavier on Tuesday onward). Avoid Friday afternoon. Avoid the weekend if you want sustained engagement. --- ## After posting Expect the first hour to be quiet. Stay near a keyboard for two reasons: 1. Reply to every comment in the first ninety minutes. HN's ranking algorithm rewards thread engagement. 2. Resist the urge to argue. If someone is hostile, thank them for the feedback, name the specific point you agree with, and move on. A common pattern on Show HN posts: someone will arrive in the first thirty minutes and accuse the project of being "yet another overlay" without reading the position. The right move is not to defend, but to point them to the FAQ and the WCAG scan report. The position sells itself if you let it. --- ## What not to do - Do not ask friends to upvote. HN detects this and shadow-flags the post. - Do not link to the post on Twitter or LinkedIn until it has at least 30 organic upvotes. Premature external traffic looks like a coordinated boost. - Do not edit the title after posting. Lowers the rank. - Do not respond to flame comments at length. One line, no defensiveness, move on. --- ## Sample replies for predictable HN comments **"Overlays are bad. This is bad."** > Agreed that the category has earned its reputation. AriaWAI is built on the same critique. We do not claim the widget delivers compliance, we ship a real WCAG scan as the path to actual fixes, and the position is on the homepage. The widget itself is a useful comfort layer for visitors who want bigger text or a dyslexia font. Both things can be true. **"Why not contribute to existing open-source accessibility tools?"** > Fair question. The closest open-source equivalent is the userland zoom and contrast settings already in browsers, plus tools like axe-core for auditing. AriaWAI is positioned for non-developer site operators who want a one-script-tag install and a managed scan, not for developers who would self-host axe. **"What is the honest answer about whether anyone needs this?"** > If your underlying markup is accessible, you do not need an overlay. Buy the scan instead. If your markup is not accessible, the overlay is a temporary comfort layer for visitors while you fix the markup. It does not make the markup compliant. We say this on the homepage and we will keep saying it.