Audit metrics
Every column on the Ariada audit board is defined here. The scores and counts come from an automated scan against the WCAG 2.2 AA rule pack, mapped to EN 301 549 (European Accessibility Act, Directive 2019/882/EU). Automated checks catch roughly a third of real barriers — keyboard and screen-reader passes are separate — so counts are a floor, not a ceiling.
Resource
A single scanned surface — one page or view (URL) inside a project. A project groups many resources: the sites and pages you want audited together. One row on the board is one resource.
Group
How the resource is classified, for filtering and reporting:
- core — a first-party surface of the project itself.
- bank — a pilot bank obligated under the European Accessibility Act.
- partner — a partner or ecosystem organisation.
- grantee-module — a grant-funded project whose own site is audited.
Score
A 0–10 conformance score for the resource, where 10 is best. It is not a simple pass-rate: critical defects dominate, because a single control that blocks a user makes the page unusable regardless of how much else passes. A resource with one critical barrier therefore scores low even if every other check passes. Use the score to rank work — the board sorts worst-first — and the findings below it to act.
Critical
Defects that block a user completely: a control with no accessible name, an element that cannot be operated by keyboard, a focus trap, a form field a screen-reader user cannot identify. These map to the WCAG Level A failures that stop a task from being completed at all. Fix these first.
Serious
Defects that seriously degrade the experience without fully blocking it: text contrast below 4.5:1, content outside a landmark or heading structure, a non-descriptive link. A user can often still get through, but with real friction. These are the bulk of most audits.
Findings
The total number of findings on the resource — critical plus serious plus lower-severity items. It is the raw volume of work; the score weights that volume by severity so the two together tell you both how much and how bad.
Blast radius
How many pages a single shared defect affects. A whole-codebase analysis traces a finding back to the shared component or template that produced it, so one fix in a header, footer or design-system component can clear the same barrier across every page that uses it. A high blast radius means a small fix with a large payoff.
Site
The real address of the scanned surface. It links out to the live page in a new tab so you can see exactly what was audited.
Reverter
Remediation state for the resource:
- none — no remediation proposed yet.
- recommended — a remediated version has been generated and is waiting for review.
- remediated — a fix has been applied.
Reverter proposes a corrected version of the offending markup; a human reviews and approves it before anything ships.