Re: Functional Outcomes MUST cover all benefits OR must be duplicated

Hi Jeanne,

No time for a bigger response but It is exactly because of the meeting and
minutes + example I've written the mail...

:-)

Jake

Op di 8 sep. 2020 om 14:50 schreef Jeanne Spellman <
jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>:

> Hi Jake,
>
> Thanks for raising thoughtful questions.
>
> We have been looking at these issues in the last couple weeks as we build
> out the content and test the new conformance model.  Sarah Horton did a lot
> of work last week with a spreadsheet model to test the consistency of the
> content and look for patterns.
>
> I recommend reading the minutes from Friday and look at the consistency
> spreadsheet.  The recommendation we looked at Friday was to roughly define
> Outcomes as having an AND relationship with the guidelines (you have to
> have [this] Outcome AND [this] Outcome AND [this] Outcome.).  There is an
> OR relationship with Methods: (you can do it [this] way OR [that way].
> Most of the time, the OR will be technology related and probably wouldn't
> need a decision tree.  In the case of Alt Text, decision trees have been
> valuable tools in the past and could be useful going forward.
>
> I want to emphasize that this model needs more detailed testing, but as a
> model for moving forward to FPWD, this looks viable and I think addresses
> both of your questions.  Please bring any additional concerns to the
> group.  It is helpful to keep working out the details of the model.
>
> 1) Email summary of minutes of 4 September 2020
> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-silver/2020Sep/0010.html>
>
> 2) Consistency spreadsheet
> <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_Vu0ix-d-Qrv1wDZYQhfUX6jICE_bRalypp1rtcie8w/#gid=1109648765>
> On 9/7/2020 3:46 AM, jake abma wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Just another issue we must have correct or discuss at least before
> publication I think.
>
> --------------------
>
> As Guidelines are not normative but (Functional) Outcomes are, they must
> cover all benefits for all Functional Groups and Functional Needs we try to
> tackle.
>
> This means the "so... bla bla" statement should be broad enough to cover
> all benefits OR a bulleted list might be needed with the benefits (and are
> the benefits normative then?).
>
> --------------------
>
> On the other hand, if we use bulleted lists for Benefits, then all methods
> and the scoring / tests MUST cover all benefits also otherwise they are not
> compatible (Charles Hall commented on this in the functional needs
> subgroup).
>
> --------------------
>
> If this is not a "Catch All" for (Functional) Outcomes, we might need to
> split / duplicate Outcomes covering different Benefits (?!)
>
> --------------------
> EXAMPLE 1
> --------------------
>
> "Provides semantic structure So can convey a sense of hierarchy"
>
> In this case the benefits of navigating or locating are not mentioned,
> also the Functional Needs are not covered as it's not in the normative text.
>
> Three options for this example:
>
> 1. (long sentence, covering all benefits)
>
> "Provides semantic structure So can convey a sense of hierarchy AND/OR
> users can navigate AND/OR users can locate"
>
> 2. (use of bulleted list)
>
> "Provides semantic structure
>
>    - So can convey a sense of hierarchy
>    - So users can navigate
>    - So users can locate"
>
> 3. (split in 3 Functional Outcomes)
>
>
> "Provides semantic structure so can convey a sense of hierarchy"
> "Provides semantic structure so users can navigate"
> "Provides semantic structure so users can locate"
>
> --------------------
>
> This is just an example of the challenge with the Functional Outcome texts
> being normative, more examples are not difficult to think of.
>
> Another option would be to separate the Benefits from the functional
> outcome and mention them as something like: " Benefits might be but not
> limited to: bla, bla and bla"
>
> --------------------
>
> At the moment I think the Functional Outcomes as we have now are to open
> to interpretation and probably will not make it as normative text to be
> tested and scored.
>
> Of course happy to illustrate of dsicus.
>
> Cheers,
> Jake
>
>
>
>
>