Perspective

I know it's here, but I can't find it

Information or functionality exists, but the structure or navigation makes locating it unnecessarily difficult.

Availability is not the same as findability.

What happens

A person knows information or a feature exists but cannot predict where it lives, distinguish navigation choices, scan the page efficiently or relocate something they found before.

Why it matters

Finding information can demand attention, memory and repeated exploration. A technically complete page can still impose substantial cognitive and navigational work.

How to test it

Use realistic information-finding tasks. Review headings, landmarks, link purpose, navigation consistency, page titles and alternative ways of locating content. Observe where people backtrack, reread or guess.

Can automation detect it?

Mostly not as a whole. Automation can detect some structural failures, but not whether an information architecture is understandable or whether labels match users’ expectations.

Relevant WCAG

Specific causes may relate to 2.4 Navigable criteria such as 2.4.2 Page Titled, 2.4.4 Link Purpose, 2.4.5 Multiple Ways, 2.4.6 Headings and Labels, or 2.4.10 Section Headings at AAA. Not every findability problem is a WCAG failure.

Standards & guidance

• WCAG 2.2: navigation, headings, labels and link-purpose criteria may be relevant depending on the observed cause.
• W3C Cognitive Accessibility Supplemental Guidance: Help Users Understand What Things are and How to Use Them — informative guidance on orientation, familiar patterns, labels and signposts.

No Default treats supplemental guidance as evidence and design guidance, not as a WCAG conformance requirement.

What a pass does not prove

Correct headings and navigation semantics do not prove that people can predict where information is or understand the organisation.