comparison
RGAA vs WCAG 2.2
RGAA (Référentiel général d'amélioration de l'accessibilité, France, 2009) and WCAG 2.2 (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2, Global (referenced by most national accessibility laws), 2023) are two of the most-referenced accessibility frameworks in digital compliance. This guide compares them side by side — jurisdiction, scope, conformance approach, penalties, and how a single audit can cover both simultaneously.
What is RGAA?
France's Référentiel général d'amélioration de l'accessibilité (RGAA) is the French government's national web accessibility methodology, currently at version 4.1, that operationalises EN 301 549 / WCAG 2.1 AA with 106 control tests and is mandatory for public-sector and (since the EAA transposition) large-private-sector French websites.
Maintainer
DINUM (Direction interministérielle du numérique)
Jurisdiction and enforcement
France. DINUM; ARCOM for audiovisual.
What is WCAG 2.2?
WCAG 2.2 (pronounced 'wuh-cag 2.2') is the World Wide Web Consortium's globally adopted standard for web accessibility, published October 2023, defining 87 testable success criteria organised under four principles: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, Robust.
Maintainer
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Jurisdiction and enforcement
Global (referenced by most national accessibility laws). Referenced by ADA, EAA, Section 508, AODA and many others.
RGAA vs WCAG 2.2 — the key differences
The principal difference is jurisdictional: RGAA applies in France, while WCAG 2.2 applies in Global (referenced by most national accessibility laws). RGAA is maintained by DINUM (Direction interministérielle du numérique); WCAG 2.2 is maintained by World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). The standards differ on scope, conformance grading, and penalty structure — but a well-designed accessibility programme can satisfy both simultaneously by adopting the strictest applicable requirement and cross-mapping findings.
Scope
RGAA covers: Public-sector websites, Large private-sector websites (under EAA transposition). WCAG 2.2 covers: Web content, Mobile web, Web applications, PDF documents (with PDF/UA), EPUB publications.
Penalties
RGAA: Up to €50,000 administrative fine. WCAG 2.2: United States: civil penalties under ADA Title III; demand letters typically settle at $3,000–$25,000; litigated cases can reach $50,000+ in attorney-fee awards.
How to comply with both at once
Adopt the stricter applicable conformance level — typically WCAG 2.2 Level AA — as your engineering baseline. Audit against that baseline once, then cross-map findings to both RGAA and WCAG 2.2 specific requirements. A single Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) using VPAT 2.5 INT can document both.
When you might need just one
If you operate exclusively in France and have no cross-border procurement exposure, you may only need RGAA. The same applies in reverse for WCAG 2.2. For organisations selling cross-border, into the EU or US public sector, the safer default is to plan to both simultaneously.
Sources
- RGAA 4.1 — DINUM
- Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 — W3C
- WCAG 2 Overview — W3C WAI
- What's New in WCAG 2.2 — W3C WAI
- Test Evaluating Web Accessibility — W3C WAI
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Cited answers. Sourced. Updated as standards and case law change.
Is RGAA stricter than WCAG 2.2?
Neither standard is uniformly "stricter" — they cover different regulatory domains. RGAA is more prescriptive about public-sector websites; WCAG 2.2 about web content. For organisations exposed to both, a unified WCAG 2.2 AA baseline typically satisfies the technical requirements of both.
Can a single audit satisfy RGAA and WCAG 2.2?
Yes. Both standards ultimately reference WCAG-aligned criteria. A combined audit with cross-mapped findings can produce documentation acceptable to both regulators.
Which jurisdictions enforce RGAA?
France. DINUM; ARCOM for audiovisual.
Which jurisdictions enforce WCAG 2.2?
Global (referenced by most national accessibility laws). Referenced by ADA, EAA, Section 508, AODA and many others.
What happens if I am not compliant with RGAA?
Up to €50,000 administrative fine
What happens if I am not compliant with WCAG 2.2?
United States: civil penalties under ADA Title III; demand letters typically settle at $3,000–$25,000; litigated cases can reach $50,000+ in attorney-fee awards European Union: fines under EAA national transpositions vary by member state, up to €1,000,000 in some jurisdictions Canada (AODA): C$50,000–C$100,000 per day per violation in Ontario
Stop guessing. Get the audit a Fortune 500 a11y team would have written.
Free audit on your live URL. No sign-up. IAAP-format report. Ready in hours.
founders@accessivepath.com · +977 9851094056