Use risk score for triage, not certification
The technical risk score condenses unsuppressed deterministic and partial failures into a 0–100 remediation priority. It is useful for sorting work and observing trends. It is not a percentage accessible, a standards score, or a legal conclusion.
aps-risk-1 weights
| Severity | Base weight |
|---|---|
| Blocker | 40 |
| Critical | 20 |
| Major | 8 |
| Minor | 2 |
| Info | 0 |
Each additional occurrence contributes 25% of the base weight, up to four additional occurrences. Document-wide findings multiply their contribution by 1.5. The final score is capped at 100.
Heuristics, manual checks, and suppressed findings do not contribute.
Why two equal scores can mean different things
A score of 40 could represent one blocker, two critical findings, or a larger set of major and minor failures. Always pair the score with severity counts, findings, coverage, and manual review.
The score also does not normalize by page count, DOM size, or document length. It is intentionally a technical impact signal, not a comparison of organizational compliance.
Recommended product use
- Sort a remediation backlog within one project and policy set.
- Track whether a compatible release trend is improving.
- Draw attention to document-wide or high-severity failures.
- Use the quality gate—not a hand-written risk threshold—to enforce release policy.
Do not use the score in marketing claims such as “92% accessible.” That interpretation is not supported by the model.