Target Size
Interactive targets need to be large enough and spaced enough to hit reliably.
Definition
WCAG 2.2 introduced 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) at level AA, requiring targets of at least 24 by 24 CSS pixels, with exceptions where sufficient spacing exists. The earlier AAA criterion 2.5.5 sets 44 by 44.
Craft convention. True because the industry converged on it. Breaking it costs familiarity, not correctness.
On this plate
Reach for this when
- Any touch interface.
- Dense tables and toolbars.
- Accessibility review.
Common mistakes
- Icon-sized hit areas.
- Adjacent targets with no spacing.
- Density settings that shrink hit areas along with visual spacing.
Practical rules
- Design to 44 by 44 for touch, even though AA requires 24. Platform guidance from Apple and Google both sit at or above that.
- The hit area is what counts, not the visible icon. Expand it with padding or a pseudo-element.
- Spacing can substitute for size under 2.5.8, so a smaller target with a clear gap can conform.
- Include the label in the target for checkboxes, radios and list rows.
- Keep destructive targets away from frequently used ones.
- Inline links in prose are exempt, since enlarging them would disrupt the text.
Sizes by context
| Context | Work to | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Any touch target | 44 by 44 CSS pixels | Matches Apple's 44pt and is close to Google's 48dp. WCAG 2.5.8 asks for 24, which is a floor rather than a target. |
| A dense table on touch | 44, or one overflow control per row | Three 24 pixel icons in a 32 pixel row is the most common failure of this criterion in product software. |
| Pointer-only interfaces | 24 minimum, with spacing | Spacing counts under 2.5.8, so a small target with clear separation can conform. |
| Anything destructive | Full size, and separated | Size and distance from its neighbours are what prevent the mis-tap, not the confirmation afterwards. |
| Inline links in prose | Exempt | Enlarging them would disturb the line, which the criterion recognises. |
Making targets reachable
Do
- Expand the hit area with padding rather than growing the icon.
- Include the label in the target for checkboxes, radios and rows.
- Keep at least the target's own width of space between adjacent small controls.
- Test on a real phone, one-handed, which finds the reach problems a desktop browser cannot.
Do not
- Do not put two small targets next to each other where one of them is destructive.
- Do not rely on a hover affordance to reveal a target that has to be hit on touch.
- Do not shrink targets to fit more in. Reduce what is shown instead.
- Do not measure the icon and call it the target. Measure what actually responds to the tap.
Both conform. Only one fits a finger
Local chart
A11Y·011 · Region V · Grid B3
This entry and the entries it is stated to connect with. Each line is labelled with what the connection means.
Sources
Where a source establishes something narrower than the popular reading of it, the note says so.
- [1]
Continue from here
Each link says what the connection is, so you can tell a principle from an alternative from a thing people mix this up with.
Applies when you are designing
Why this works
The reasoning this entry rests on.
- Fitts's LawLAW·002 · Law
The WCAG minimum is the accessibility floor under an effect that is really about distance and size together.
Relied on by
Entries that assume this is already in place.
- ButtonCMP·001 · Component
- Data TableCMP·025 · Component
- SliderCMP·008 · Component
- Mobile Interaction PatternsPAT·027 · Pattern
Practical example
A worked decision where this was the deciding factor.
- Choosing a Density for an Analytics DashboardCASE·004 · Case study
Check your work
Review passes that test whether this was done properly.
- Mobile UX ChecklistCHK·003 · Checklist
Related concept
Connected closely enough to change how you apply this.
- Adaptive LayoutFND·044 · UI foundation
- DensityFND·016 · UI foundation
- Spacing SystemsFND·042 · UI foundation