diff --git a/content/notes/2022-web-almanac-accessibility.md b/content/notes/2022-web-almanac-accessibility.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7aae232
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/notes/2022-web-almanac-accessibility.md
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+---
+title: "Reflections on the 2022 Web Almanac’s accessibility findings"
+date: 2022-10-10T21:37:52-07:00
+replyURI: "https://almanac.httparchive.org/en/2022/accessibility"
+replyTitle: "Accessibility: The 2022 Web Almnac"
+replyType: "TechArticle"
+replyAuthor: "HTTP Archive"
+replyAuthorURI: "https://httparchive.org/"
+replyAuthorType: "Organization"
+---
+
+I have a few thoughts on these findings:
+
+1. The Almanac says skip links commonly skip to the `<main>` element; I consider [large focusable containers an anti-pattern]({{<relref "/posts/website-best-practices.md#against-focusable-containers">}}) since they ruin keyboard navigability, and recommend skipping to a heading instead.
+
+2. The Almanac identifies accessible live regions by `role="live"`. I'd suggest also looking into `role="feed"`, which represents a common type of live region.
+
+Some common accessibility issues I'd be interested in for future editions:
+
+- Contrast that's too high
+- Setting custom foregrounds but not custom backgrounds, and vice versa
+- Removing link underlines
+- Focusable containers
+- Using icon fonts without accessible names
+
+Overall, it's a good look at the small subset of accessibility issues that are automatically detectable (most of which are far less critical than manually-detectable issues).