WCAG 2.2 adds new success criteria on top of 2.1. Six of them are at levels A and AA. They are not yet what most laws require, so they do not count in your compliance score, but they are checked in every Expert Manual Review and reported in their own section.
The WCAG 2.2 checks
| Criterion | In plain words |
|---|---|
| 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured | When you move through a page with the keyboard, the highlighted item is not hidden behind sticky headers, banners or pop ups. |
| 2.5.7 Dragging Movements | Anything that needs dragging, such as a slider or a sortable list, can also be done with a simple click or tap. |
| 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) | Buttons and links are big enough, or far enough apart, to hit reliably. |
| 3.2.6 Consistent Help | Help, such as contact details or a chat link, is in the same place on every page. |
| 3.3.7 Redundant Entry | People are not asked to type the same information twice in one process. |
| 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication | Signing in does not depend on remembering or transcribing something, such as solving a puzzle, without an alternative. |
A best practice check
The review also notes whether you publish an accessibility statement: a page saying what standard you aim for, what you know is not yet accessible, and how people can contact you if they have a problem. It is not a WCAG criterion, but it is required in some places and expected in many.
Why they are kept separate
Mixing them into your score would misrepresent your obligations. A site could meet WCAG 2.1 AA fully and still fail some of these, and you should be able to see both facts clearly. So they appear under Beyond the Legal Minimum in your expert audit and report, and nowhere in the score.
Should you fix them anyway?
Usually, yes. They address real barriers, several are cheap to fix, and standards tend to move towards the newest version of WCAG over time. Fixing them now means not having to revisit the same pages later.