Re: is any WCAG criteria to account both default and Dark mode for content

> If my clients pay for the extra service, sure...if I'm just hired to do
a pure "do we comply with the letter of WCAG yes or no?", then ...

The amount of work involved in testing (and if necessary reporting) the few
commonly found accessibility issues that are not (yet) covered by the WCAG
is very small compared with the overall task. I am a firm believer that we,
as accessibility consultants, should be educating companies and
organisations to the idea that we should be testing for accessibility, not
just for WCAG (or legal) compliance. The accessibility industry exists to
serve disabled people, not companies and institutions (who, in some cases,
are not concerned about disabled people at all and merely want an audit and
remediation to keep clear of the law!)

I advertise my audit services as an "accessibility and WCAG audit", and
make clear in the marketing documentation that that is what the client will
get. (I believe that actually enhances my profile in client's eyes - they
will see they are getting quality work, not just technical compliance for
the sake of it.) I have never yet had anyone come back and ask me to cut
out the accessibility bits and just do a WCAG audit. (And if they did, the
price would still be just the same - as I say, the extra work involved is
minute compared to the whole thing.)

Put it another way - if success criteria to cover WHC mode and dark modes
were added to the WCAG tomorrow, would you suddenly increase your prices?
Probably not?