B

Web Accessibility Auto-Scroll Auditor

4.05

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Recognition of auto-scroll issues in web accessibility
→
Step 2 Web accessibility compliance tools
→
Step 3 Accessibility violation detection and fix guide specifically for auto-scroll and moving content

Problem

After the expansion of mandatory web accessibility requirements under the Anti-Discrimination Against and Remedies for Persons with Disabilities Act in 2025, SMEs and shopping malls must obtain web accessibility certification. However, moving content such as auto-scrolling banners, auto-playing videos, and infinite scroll feeds accounts for about 25% of all accessibility errors, violating WCAG 2.2 Level AA. Existing accessibility testing tools (WAVE, Lighthouse) cannot accurately detect these dynamic content violations, and professional consulting costs 2 to 5 million KRW (approx. $1,500 to $3,750) per case.

Solution

When a URL is entered, the page is rendered using Puppeteer/Playwright to automatically detect moving content such as auto-scroll, auto-play, flashing, and infinite scroll, and report WCAG 2.2 violations. For each violation, it provides framework-specific (React/Vue/WordPress) code fix examples and priority scores, and tracks certification readiness through re-testing after fixes.

Target: Development team leads at small shopping malls and web service operators with annual revenue of 100 million to 2 billion KRW (approx. $75,000 to $1.5 million), and freelancers who handle web accessibility certification on behalf of clients.
Revenue Model: Per inspection: 3,900 KRW (approx. $2.93) for up to 10 pages; monthly subscription: 29,000 KRW/month (approx. $21.75) for unlimited inspections and tracking; reseller for certification agencies: 99,000 KRW/month (approx. $74.25).
Ecosystem Role: Regulation
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
3.0/5
U Urgency
5.0/5
M Market
4.0/5
R Realizability
4.0/5
V Validation
4.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20

Feasibility (77%)

Tech Complexity
34.7/40
Data Availability
22.5/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (61/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
16.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
12.0/15
Solo Buildability
8.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Backend [medium] Frontend [low] Infrastructure [low]
Dashboard