Accessibility Statement

Jaen Babymon is used at three in the morning, by people who are exhausted, often one-handed, and often with the phone brightness as low as it will go. Accessibility is not a compliance exercise for this product — the people most likely to have larger text, higher contrast or reduced motion switched on are exactly the people it is built for.

This statement covers the jaenworld.com website and the Jaen Babymon apps for iOS and Android.

We would rather tell you this than let you find it.

• Jaen has not been formally audited against WCAG 2.1 AA. We do not claim conformance, because nobody has checked it end to end.
• The contrast and touch-target checks described above cover the app's main screens, not every screen. The monitor's controls are checked, but the video picture itself cannot be — no automated check can look at a live camera feed. The near-dark “4 AM mode” is not covered by the automated checks at all: our measuring tool reports impossible values on that palette, so any number we published for it would be untrue. We checked it by reading the rendered pixels directly instead, and it passed — but we are not counting that as a verified result.
• Automated checks are not the same as a person trying to use the app. They catch sizes, contrast and missing labels; they do not catch a label that is technically present but unhelpful, or an order that makes no sense to navigate.
• Screen-reader support has been implemented but has not been tested by screen-reader users on real devices.
• The website has not been audited separately from the app. 36 of its public pages are now graded mechanically on every build for page structure, headings, landmarks, accessible names, form labelling and ARIA validity — including the sign-up, log-in and password-reset pages, the invitation page, the documentation, the help articles, the status page and the legal terms. That grader is what found a skip link which had never worked on any page, a homepage sign-up field with no label at all, search boxes with no label of any kind, a sort control that announced nothing but “combobox”, and page titles that were styled boxes rather than headings, so those pages gave a screen reader nothing to land on. The site has more public pages than that, and the rest are not yet graded; where the skip-link fault has not been fixed by hand, it is still present on them. It runs without a browser, so it can say nothing about how a page is painted.
• A second check now covers that. It drives the same 36 pages in a real browser and measures colour contrast, tap-target size, focus visibility, and reflow at 200% zoom and at a 320-pixel width. It also measures the colour of text while you hover it or tab to it, and not only at rest — a button can be perfectly readable sitting still and not readable under your finger. It looks for the pressed state too; across the 36 pages it grades, no text was found that changes colour while it is held down, so nothing has been measured in that state. It is run on demand, not on every build. Its first run found text on the sign-in page at a contrast of about 1.1 to 1 — effectively invisible — buttons and badges that painted nothing at all, a primary button whose label was white on pale teal, an accordion that showed no visible keyboard focus, and a page that scrolled sideways on a small phone. All of those are fixed. Adding the hover and focus states found five more, all on the help pages. Three are readable while the page sits still and drop below the required contrast the moment a pointer is on them, which is the whole reason for checking. The other two were already too faint sitting still, and the pointer reading is what made them impossible to keep ignoring. Those are fixed as well. Controls that are switched off are counted and named rather than graded: the standard exempts them, so a faint label on a greyed-out button is not counted here as a failure. Where text sits on a gradient, a photograph or a see-through layer, the colour underneath it cannot be worked out honestly — about one text element in six here — and those are counted and left unmeasured rather than guessed at. What neither check measures: non-text contrast, whether keyboard focus ends up hidden behind sticky headers, text spacing, motion, a menu that only appears while you hover, and anything a screen reader would tell you. Those are unchecked here, and a passing run is not evidence about them.

Jaen is in closed beta. These gaps are being worked through, and this page will be updated as they close — including when a claim becomes true enough to make.

Please tell us. An accessibility problem in a baby monitor is a safety problem, not a cosmetic one, and it goes to the front of the queue.

Write to and describe what you were trying to do, what happened, and which assistive technology you use. We aim to reply within five working days.

If you are not satisfied with our response, you can contact the Estonian Consumer Protection and Technical Regulatory Authority (Tarbijakaitse ja Tehnilise Järelevalve Amet), which supervises accessibility requirements in Estonia, where JaenWorld OÜ is registered.