Skip to content

Method

Severity: what counts as critical, serious, moderate or minor here

A finding on its own does not say what to do first. That is why every finding carries a severity that reflects the impact on affected users. This page lists all 25 checks with their level and the reasoning. It is not typed by hand: it is generated from the same table the engine reads when it writes a severity into a finding.

A severity is not a conformance verdict

Conformance is binary per success criterion: met or not met. A page carrying only „minor“ findings is still non-conformant for every criterion those findings violate. Severity sequences the work, it does not replace an assessment against EN 301 549.

The four levels

  • Critical

    1 checks

    The barrier stops an affected user from completing the task at all. There is no workaround on the page itself: focus is trapped, a control cannot be operated, required content is unreachable.

    Weight in the score: 10

  • Serious

    15 checks

    The task stays possible but the barrier removes a normal route to it: content or state does not reach assistive technology, an element cannot be reached the usual way, or content is lost under an adaptation the standard guarantees.

    Weight in the score: 5

  • Moderate

    9 checks

    The task can be completed, but with avoidable effort or uncertainty: information arrives in an unhelpful order, a label does not match what is spoken, an error message identifies the problem without showing the way out.

    Weight in the score: 2

The full catalog

Every row is a check the engine runs, with its analysis layer, the WCAG criterion it assesses and the reasoning behind its level.

Critical

Checks at level Critical
What is checkedLayerCriterionWhy this level
Keyboard focus enters a region and cannot leave it with Tab, Shift-Tab or Escape.Layer 2Keyboard2.1.2No Keyboard TrapA keyboard user is stuck on the page with no way forward. Nothing else on the page can be reached afterwards, so this is the definition of blocking.

Serious

Checks at level Serious
What is checkedLayerCriterionWhy this level
An interactive control is never reached by the Tab sequence, or sits under aria-hidden while still being focusable.Layer 2Keyboard2.1.1KeyboardThe control is unusable without a mouse, but the rest of the page still works, so the task often survives via another route.
Focusing a control changes almost nothing visually, so the focus position is not recognisable.Layer 2Keyboard2.4.7Focus VisibleKeyboard operation stays technically possible but blind-navigating a page you cannot see your position on is a normal route removed, not a cosmetic issue.
When focused, the control is completely hidden behind sticky or overlay content.focused control fully coveredLayer 2Keyboard2.4.11Focus Not Obscured (Minimum)The user has focus on something invisible: the same practical effect as no focus indicator at all.
An image's alternative text is missing or does not convey what the image contributes.Layer 3AI visual review1.1.1Non-text ContentThe information in the image does not arrive at all for anyone who cannot see it, which removes a route to the content rather than merely complicating it.
The order content is announced in diverges from the order it visually reads in.Layer 3AI visual review1.3.2Meaningful SequenceThe page is announced in a sequence that does not carry its meaning, so comprehension breaks even though every element is present.
Visual judgment of a focus indicator that the keyboard layer measured as doubtful (2.4.7 or 2.4.11, whichever the evidence supports).inherits the severity of the keyboard observation it was asked to judgeLayer 3AI visual reviewdepends on the findingThis check does not invent a level: it confirms or clears an existing keyboard observation and keeps that observation's severity.
At 320 CSS pixels the page requires scrolling in both directions to read its content.Layer 4Adaptation1.4.10ReflowOn a phone or at high zoom, reading means chasing the text sideways line by line: a normal route to the content is gone.
At 200 percent text size, content is cut off, overlaps or disappears.Layer 4Adaptation1.4.4Resize TextAnyone who needs larger text loses content outright, and enlarging is the standard adaptation the criterion guarantees.
The page suppresses zooming (for example user-scalable=no or a maximum-scale below 2).Layer 4Adaptation1.4.4Resize TextThe adaptation is not merely broken, it is switched off: the user cannot even attempt to enlarge.
Content is locked to one screen orientation without an essential reason.Layer 4Adaptation1.3.4OrientationAnyone whose device is fixed in the other orientation, for example mounted on a wheelchair, cannot use the content at all.
A widget arrives in the resolved accessibility tree without an accessible name.Layer 5Accessibility tree4.1.2Name, Role, ValueA screen reader announces the control without saying what it is for, so operating it becomes guesswork.
A widget does not expose its state (expanded, checked, selected) in the tree.Layer 5Accessibility tree4.1.2Name, Role, ValueThe user cannot tell what the control currently does, so the feedback loop that makes it operable is missing.
An element is mouse-operable but reaches the tree as a generic node, or not at all.Layer 5Accessibility tree1.3.1Info and RelationshipsFor assistive technology the control does not exist: it is invisible in exactly the layer that conveys structure.
A status or error message appears without live-region semantics.Layer 6Dynamic content4.1.3Status MessagesAnyone not looking at that spot never learns the result of their action, which silently breaks the flow.
A validation error is not identified in text, or is not programmatically tied to its field.Layer 6Dynamic content3.3.1Error IdentificationThe form refuses to submit and the user cannot find out which field is wrong: the task stalls.

Moderate

Checks at level Moderate
What is checkedLayerCriterionWhy this level
When focused, part of the control is covered by overlay content.focused control partly coveredLayer 2Keyboard2.4.11Focus Not Obscured (Minimum)Enough of the control usually stays visible to keep orientation, so this hinders rather than blocks.
A positive tabindex overrides the natural order, or focus jumps sharply backwards against the visual reading order.Layer 2Keyboard2.4.3Focus OrderEverything remains reachable, the sequence is just confusing: added effort, not a blocked task.
Link or button text does not say where it goes or what it does, out of context.Layer 3AI visual review2.4.4Link Purpose (In Context)The target is still reachable, it just takes surrounding context to understand: friction rather than a blocked task.
With the WCAG text-spacing values applied, text clips or overlaps.Layer 4Adaptation1.4.12Text SpacingReadability suffers and single passages can become unreadable, but the page usually stays operable.
Content shown on hover or focus cannot be dismissed, cannot be hovered itself, or vanishes too early.Layer 4Adaptation1.4.13Content on Hover or FocusThe information is reachable but hard to keep on screen, which hinders rather than blocks.
The visible label is not contained in the accessible name.Layer 5Accessibility tree2.5.3Label in NameVoice control can fail on the visible wording, and the announcement diverges from what is on screen: usually confusing rather than blocking.
The order in the accessibility tree diverges from the visual order.Layer 5Accessibility tree1.3.2Meaningful SequenceContent arrives in an unexpected sequence: comprehension suffers, but the elements are all present.
A live region is inserted into the DOM with its message already inside it.Layer 6Dynamic content4.1.3Status MessagesDepending on the assistive technology the message may or may not be announced: an unreliable announcement rather than a certain miss.
An identified error does not say how to correct it.Layer 6Dynamic content3.3.3Error SuggestionThe user knows where the problem is and can fix it by trial and error: extra effort, not a dead end.

Layer 1: why there is no separate catalog for it

The rules layer runs axe-core with around seventy rules for WCAG A and AA and takes its rating unchanged (critical, serious, moderate, minor). That is deliberate: axe maintains its scale against the same user-impact question, and rating each rule ourselves would be a fork that drifts with every update. Where a result carries no rating at all, we file it as moderate rather than dropping it.

Severity is not confidence

Severity says how bad it is if the finding holds. Confidence says how sure we are that it holds. They are separate axes: human review is decided by confidence alone, never by severity. A critical finding with clear evidence is accepted automatically; a minor one with unclear evidence goes to review.

Request a free scan

Tell us your domain - we run a free initial scan and show you the most important barriers.