RE: Definition of human testability

Sailesh wrote: 

    Present draft: "Success criteria for all levels would be testable.
Some success criteria
may be machine-testable. Others may require human judgment.  
Success criteria that require human testing would, in the judgment of the
working group members,  yield consistent results among multiple
knowledgeable testers."
Comment:
Wording of the last sentence is confusing. I believe what is meant is:
"Judgment of the working group members" applies to identification of
criteria that can be tested with  consistency  and reliability  by humans.
Right? 
Do we intend to list these tests?
Consider following alternatives:
1. In the judgment of the working group members, certain success criteria
can be tested by humans in a manner that is capable of yielding consistent
results among multiple knowledgeable testers.
 
2. Claims of conformance  to success criteria can be based on human testing
is such testing has yielded or is capable of yielding consistent results
among multiple knowledgeable testers. 

My interpretation of this is quite different. In my interpretation, the
"testable text" is just an explanation of a feature that all success
criteria have in common: they are realiably testable. The text explains the
way we have chosen and formulated the succes criteria. It doesn't have
anything to do with conformance claims, or the way people should test
whether they pass or fail. 
 
My non-scientific version of the text:
 
"We have only included success criteria for which you can objectively
determine whether the web content fails or passes. " 
 
"In the judgement of the working group members" means us, the WCAG
workgroup. "yield consistent results among multiple knowledgeable testers"
means that the criterion it's objective, meaning most people who know what
they're talking about will agree if the web content meets the criterion or
not.
 
Yvette Hoitink
Heritas, Enschede, The Netherlands
E-mail: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl
WWW: http://www.heritas.nl