Re: Measure vs Evaluation example Re: Minutes: Silver meeting of 19 January 2021

From Frederick's second reference,

> *Measurement is about numbers and data and standardised tests.
Evaluation benefits form the opportunity to use the data in order to
compare and judge the success rate of a person or an object that may not
necessarily be quantified.  Paintings, novels and individual performance
can all be evaluated by professionals in their field of expertise. The
addition of measured data adds verification to the evaluation and provides
accurate performance indicators as each measurement can be compared.
 Measurements are more objective as they have numerical standards to
compare and record.  Evaluation could be seen to be more subjective as the
evaluator and measures used are part of human sciences and performance
related.*

*Concern:* "...* Paintings, novels and individual performance can all be
evaluated by professionals in their field of expertise*..." - if deriving a
final 'score' in the WCAG 3 framework requires the presence or
participation of a "professional" (expert) then we're introducing a
significant barrier of adoption, as not all targeted content creators will
have access to that resource(s).

*Requirement:* "...*The addition of measured data adds verification to the
evaluation and provides accurate performance indicators as each measurement
can be compared*..." - from a conformance/compliance perspective, measured
data is what (I argue) we require. The ability for anyone (from expert to
initiate) to have raw, measured data will then facilitate their ability to
evaluate that data going forward. I maintain that the real goal for WCAG 3
is *accurate performance indicators *(with an emphasis on 'accurate').

*Scoring:* with measurable data and accurate indicators, we can then
produce a score that anyone can verify: business owners, legal counsel,
judges and adjudicators, etc. - no secret sauce or special skills required.
Evaluated data however requires expertise, and is wholly subjective
depending on the 'expert'. While that kind of 'expert opinion' will likely
continue to factor into any legal challenges or contested compliance
claims, I assert we should be trying to remove that subjectivity, not add
to it.

*Guidelines versus Standards*: I have heard some suggest that we're working
on a *Guideline*, an assertion/assumption I seriously question. Aside from
nomenclature, one key change when the W3C advanced WCAG 1 to WCAG 2 was the
change of status (WCAG 2 is a W3C *Recommendation*).

"Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) is developed through the W3C
process in cooperation with individuals and organizations around the world,
with a goal of providing a single shared *standard *for web content
accessibility that meets the needs of individuals, organizations, and
governments internationally... WCAG 2.0 and WCAG 2.1 are both existing
*standards*."
(https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/)


The W3C creates web *standards*, which includes the WAI "Domain":

*How WAI Develops Accessibility Standards through the W3C Process *-
https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/w3c-process/


Additionally, WCAG *IS* also an ISO Standard
(
https://www.w3.org/blog/2012/10/wcag-20-is-now-also-isoiec-405/#:~:text=We're%20very%20pleased%20to,ISO/IEC%2040500:2012.&text=Since%20it%20was%20published%20in,and%20organizations%20around%20the%20world.)


...which in the context of at least some territories (Japan), is critical.
Will WCAG 3 also become an ISO Standard? It's too soon to tell, and I
assert will also depend on the finished product - if it meets the
requirements for an ISO standard, then perhaps yes: if it does not meet
those requirements, then the answer will most likely be no. I believe this
is an additional consideration we should not lose sight of.

Respectfully,

JF




On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 12:23 AM Andrew Somers <andy@generaltitles.com>
wrote:

> Here is an example that is directly related:* Visual Contrast.*
>
> *Measure:* Put in two colors into the APCA tool, and it gives a *measure*
> of the predicted contrast for those two colors if they are adjacent and
> touching. The tool also gives a minimum font size and weight.
>
> But here’s the rub: there is no standard for weight or size of fonts.
>
> *Evaluation: * So the *evaluation* is that a font must be compared to the
> standard (Helvetica or Arial) and adjustments made to compensate for
> differences. This is somewhat subjective and not a measure, but an
> evaluation.
>
> A third type that is often part of the above two in some way:
>
> *Empirical:* A measure may be via a tool that is using a sampling of data
> collected through evaluation or empirical study, i.e. a consolidation of
> multiple evaluations or an averaging of multiple measures, usually made by
> different individuals. Something that is a measure may be based on
> something that was originally an evaluation, and an evaluation may be based
> on parameters that were derived from a range of measurements.
>
>
>
> Andrew Somers
> Senior Color Science Researcher
> *PerceptEx Perception Research Project*
> <https://www.myndex.com/perceptex/>
> Address Redacted for List
> <https://www.myndex.com/perceptex/>
>
> On Jan 19, 2021, at 3:38 PM, Frederick Boland <frederickboland@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> What's the difference between measurement and evaluation?
>
> https://www.axiapr.com/blog/whats-the-difference-between-measurement-and-evaluation
>
> Difference between measurement and evaluation:
>
> http://www.differencebetween.net/language/difference-between-measurement-and-evaluation/#:~:text=Measurement%20and%20evaluation%20are%20processes,or%20object%20and%20their%20performance.&text=Measurement%20is%20all%20about%20the,t
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, January 19, 2021, 10:34:16 AM EST, Pascalides, Justine E <
> jpascalides@ets.org> wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
> The minutes from today’s Silver meeting are located at:
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/2021/01/19-silver-minutes.html
>
>
> Justine
>
>
> *From:* Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 19, 2021 8:40 AM
> *To:* Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
> *Subject:* agenda for Silver meeting of 19 January 2021
>
>
> agenda+ Update on publishing
>
> agenda+ Update on the approved Decision policy
>
> agenda+ Proposed change to next version of Requirements (take 3)
>
> agenda+ Subgroups: status on January goals?
>
> agenda+ Update from leadership
>
>
> == Links ==
>
> CFC - Approved Silver Decision Policy
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fpublic-silver%2F2021Jan%2F0069.html&data=04%7C01%7Cjpascalides%40ets.org%7Ca5ddbe6cce3f4363f47f08d8bc7fcdf2%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C637466604682169274%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=hiJkGk%2BMFSW9awjs8ecVvMuuSve%2FABG6s9FYqcb89Qo%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Minutes of where we left off with Silver Requirements
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2021%2F01%2F15-silver-minutes.html%23t06&data=04%7C01%7Cjpascalides%40ets.org%7Ca5ddbe6cce3f4363f47f08d8bc7fcdf2%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C637466604682169274%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=Ie%2B%2FTns6aZJXcHp6ocZ7xyLpKJlM6U2tY08Rhl0WwXI%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Subgroup January goals
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Ftask-forces%2Fsilver%2Fwiki%2FGoals_for_January_2021&data=04%7C01%7Cjpascalides%40ets.org%7Ca5ddbe6cce3f4363f47f08d8bc7fcdf2%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C637466604682179233%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=1%2FR%2F3wBGN4jV8qdNKmdcZD06AZFAEttsS5XhMpA9eoY%3D&reserved=0>
>
> == Conference Call Info ==
>
> https://www.w3.org/2017/08/telecon-info_silver-tue
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2017%2F08%2Ftelecon-info_silver-tue&data=04%7C01%7Cjpascalides%40ets.org%7Ca5ddbe6cce3f4363f47f08d8bc7fcdf2%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C637466604682179233%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=yH06nW9M%2BrbZZ01W3Fu3Uq12U7YAQNUDHIHGeLdGdDU%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>
> Thank you for your compliance.
> ------------------------------
>
>
>