This factor is part of Web
Quality — the weighted 0..100 score that sits above Web Standards.
Its weight depends on what kind of site is being measured. Web Standards
items take priority; this factor only enters the score once Web Standards
passes.
Base weight
0.7
applied to every site type unless overridden below
Why this weight
ARIA labels matter most on app-like and form-heavy sites.
Per-site-type overrides
Site type
Weight
Δ vs base
E-commerce
0.8
+0.1
Education
0.9
+0.2
Government
1.0
+0.3
SaaS / Product
0.9
+0.2
Site types not listed inherit the base weight.
Same factor, two depths.
What this means for your business
When a button is just an icon — a magnifying glass, a hamburger menu, a shopping cart — a blind visitor's screen reader has nothing to announce unless someone added a hidden label. Without these, your contact form and checkout are unusable for them, and that's the kind of thing that ends up in a demand letter.
Plain title: Your buttons and forms are labeled for screen readers
What we measure
ARIA labels give screen readers context for icon buttons, custom widgets, and interactive elements. Missing or invalid ARIA breaks the experience for blind users.
How to improve your score
Use semantic HTML where possible (`<button>` instead of `<div role="button">`); add `aria-label` to icon-only buttons; double-check that any `role` you add matches the element's actual behavior.
Facts
Ticket
WEBQ-57
Category
Accessibility
Status
live
Weight
0.7%
Data source
—
Service cost
Free HTML parsing
Scoring impl
implemented
Method version
v1.2.0
Implementation notes
Lint HTML for missing `aria-label` on icon-only controls, invalid `role` values, and orphaned `aria-labelledby` references.
Scoring
Scoring formulas are versioned with the methodology. The current method
(v1.2.0)
maps raw measurements to pass, warn,
fail. Factor weights determine how much each contributes to the
composite — see the methodology index for the full table.
Cited by these standards
Standards in the Standards Library whose satisfiedBy requirement tree references this factor. Each link goes to the standard's full entry — methodology, scope, and the other factors it relies on.
21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility ActAccessibilityUSIf your site embeds video — especially anything previously broadcast on TV — closed captions are required. CVAA also covers advanced communications services (VoIP, video chat, messaging).
Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities ActAccessibilityCAIf you're a public-sector body or a private org with 50+ employees in Ontario, your website has to meet WCAG 2.0 AA — and you have to file a compliance report.
Accessible Canada ActAccessibilityCAThe federal counterpart to AODA. If you're a federally regulated entity — banks, telecoms, airlines, broadcasters — you publish accessibility plans and progress reports, and your digital surfaces are in scope.
ADA Title III (digital)AccessibilityUSCourts treat consumer-facing U.S. websites as places of public accommodation. WCAG AA conformance is the de-facto safe-harbor — the DOJ has said so since 2022.
Barrierefreie-Informationstechnik-Verordnung 2.0AccessibilityEUGermany's federal accessibility regulation. Mandates WCAG 2.1 AA (via EN 301 549) for federal public-sector websites, intranets, and mobile apps.
European Accessibility ActAccessibilityEUAs of June 2025, e-commerce, banking, transport, and digital services in the EU must meet WCAG 2.1 AA — or pay fines that escalate per member state.
Israeli Standard 5568AccessibilityOTHERIsrael's adoption of WCAG 2.0 AA, made binding for nearly every commercial website serving Israeli users by Equal Rights of Persons with Disabilities Regulations.
JIS X 8341-3:2016AccessibilityOTHERJapan's national web accessibility standard. Identical in substance to WCAG 2.0 — public-sector sites are expected to conform, private sector encouraged.
Korean Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2AccessibilityOTHERSouth Korea's localization of WCAG. Public and private sites alike must conform under the Anti-Discrimination Against and Remedies for Persons with Disabilities Act.
Référentiel Général d'Amélioration de l'AccessibilitéAccessibilityEUFrance's official WCAG 2.1 AA conformance methodology. Required for public sector, and the legal compliance benchmark referenced by every French accessibility statement.
Section 508AccessibilityUSIf you sell to the U.S. federal government — or you ARE the U.S. federal government — your site has to clear this bar.
UK Equality Act 2010 (digital provisions)AccessibilityUKThe UK's ADA-equivalent. Service providers — including websites — must make "reasonable adjustments" for disabled users. WCAG AA is the de-facto evidence that you have.
WAI-ARIA Authoring Practices GuideAccessibilityglobalNot a regulation — a pattern library. When you're building a custom widget (combobox, tree, dialog), this is the reference for getting the ARIA semantics and keyboard interactions right.
WCAG 2.1 Level AAccessibilityglobalThe minimum-viable baseline of the regulation-cited WCAG version. Same warning as Level A in 2.2 — failing it means basic usability is broken.
WCAG 2.1 Level AAAccessibilityglobalThe version of WCAG most regulators actually wrote into law. EAA, UK PSBAR, and France's RGAA all cite 2.1 AA — even after 2.2 shipped.
WCAG 2.2 Level AAccessibilityglobalThe minimum-viable accessibility baseline. If you fail Level A, sighted-mouse users are probably also having a bad time.
WCAG 2.2 Level AAAccessibilityglobalThe web's de-facto baseline for accessibility. If a courtroom or compliance auditor asks whether your site is accessible, this is what they'll measure against.