SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027

• Abstract:

  This part of IEC 63478 describes the measurement methods for users’ quality of experience (QoE) parameters on multimedia conferencing services.

• Status: Not Published
• Public Enquiry End Date: 29-Sep-2025
• ICS: 33.160.60 - Multimedia systems and teleconferencing equipment
• Technical Committee: AVM - Audio, video and multimedia systems and equipment
• Current Stage: 6060 - National Implementation/Publication (Adopted Project)
• Start Date: 27-Oct-2026
• Due Date: 01-Jan-2027
• Ref Project: EN IEC 63478-3:2026 - User’s quality of experience on multimedia conferencing services - Part 3: Measurement methods

• Refers: oSIST prEN IEC 63478-2:2025 - User’s quality of experience (QoE) on multimedia conferencing services - Part 2: Requirements
• Effective Date: 22-Sep-2026

SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027 is the standard for user’s quality of experience (QoE) on multimedia conferencing services, Part 3: Measurement methods. It specifies how QoE parameters are measured for multimedia conferencing services, so service providers, developers and test teams can assess user experience in a structured way.

What does SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027 specify?

SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027 covers measurement methods for QoE parameters on multimedia conferencing services. The document is organized from general scope and references through measurement models, parameter measurement, operating functions and result presentation, followed by an informative example annex.

Annex	What it covers
Annex A	Example of QoE measurement of multimedia conferencing services

Clause 1 states the scope, Clause 2 points to IEC 63478-2, and Clause 3 defines the terms used throughout the document. Clauses 4 to 8 then move from measurement approach to models, parameter groups, workflow and reporting.

What are the key requirements of SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027?

SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027 is a measurement-method document, so its main value is in showing what to measure, when to measure it, and how to present the result. For implementation work, the document is mainly a guide for selecting measurement approaches and mapping them to QoE factors.

Measurement approach

Clause 4 separates QoE measurement into subjective, objective and hybrid approaches. In practice, this means a team can base the measurement on user feedback, technical data, or both together, depending on the QoE factor being assessed.

QoE measurement models

Clause 5 defines three models: the Timeline rating model, the Common survey model and the Honeycomb model. The Timeline rating model places measurements before, during and after the conference, which matters when a service team needs to track experience over time. The Common survey model links MCS management information with user ratings from MCC users, while the Honeycomb model evaluates seven service attributes: useful, usable, findable, credible, desirable, accessible and valuable.

QoE parameters and their grouping

Clause 6 groups QoE parameters into video quality, audio quality, synchronization, accessibility, interoperability, participation, openness and UI/UX. Table 2 lists each parameter together with its factor, measurement type and whether it is mandatory or optional, so implementers can see which items are core to the assessment.

In practice, this means the standard does not treat QoE as one score only. It breaks QoE into specific measurable topics such as visual clarity, latency, noise, echo cancellation, support for assistive technologies, captioning and transcription, cross-platform compatibility, security, open API/SDK, and feedback and notifications.

How the parameters are measured

Clauses 6.2 to 6.9 link each QoE area to measurement methods. Some items are measured mainly through user feedback, such as clarity, noise and intuitive and user-friendly design. Others are measured through objective data, such as latency, dynamic range, cross-platform compatibility, security and user group size. Some items are hybrid, combining subjective and objective views, such as accuracy and consistency across platforms.

This matters in practice because the standard tells a team whether it needs surveys, technical monitoring, feature checks or a mix of these methods for a given QoE factor.

Functional workflow for measurement

Clause 7 defines the measurement service functions as initialization, monitoring, evaluation, authentication and data management. The workflow uses the roles MCC, MCS, QMA and QMM.

In practice, this means the measurement is not just a test event. The system first identifies which QoE parameters will be measured, then collects the parameter values, analyzes them, stores the results and controls access through authentication. The document also shows that the monitoring and evaluation steps can repeat during service use.

Presentation of results

Clause 8 says QoE results can be presented as tables and charts, as report-based analysis, or as model-based output aligned with the Timeline rating, Honeycomb or Common survey models. This matters because different audiences need different formats: engineers may want numeric tables, managers may want a narrative report, and service teams may want model-based summaries.

Informative example

Annex A shows one way to apply the measurement methods in a real multimedia conferencing case. It uses a hybrid approach and focuses on video quality, audio quality, synchronization, accessibility and UI/UX, which helps readers see how the clauses can be applied together.

What terms does SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027 define?

• API (Application Programming Interface) - the interface that lets software components communicate and integrate with a service.
• MCC (Multimedia Conferencing Client) - the client side used by the participant to access the conferencing service.
• MCS (Multimedia Conferencing Server) - the server side that provides the multimedia conferencing service.
• QMA (QoE Measurement Agent) - the entity that carries out QoE measurement actions in the workflow.
• QMM (QoE Measurement Manager) - the entity that manages QoE measurement parameters and analysis.
• QoE (Quality of Experience) - the user’s perceived quality and satisfaction with the service.
• SDK (Software Development Kit) - the set of tools used by developers to build integrations or extensions.
• UI/UX (User Interface / User eXperience) - the interface and the way users experience and interact with the service.

Who uses SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027?

SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027 is used by multimedia conferencing service providers, product developers, test engineers and quality teams. It is relevant to audio, video and multimedia systems and equipment, and to services used for remote business and education meetings.

It is also useful for teams that need to check whether a service supports features such as captions, assistive technologies, interoperability, security, open APIs and consistent UI/UX across platforms. Buyers and evaluators can use it as a common basis when comparing conferencing services.

Which standards are used with SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027?

• IEC 63478-2 - the normative reference; it provides the requirements that this measurement-method part refers to.
• IEC TR 63478-1 - the series companion on general considerations for measuring user’s QoE.
• ITU-T P.910 - a reference for subjective video quality assessment methods.
• ITU-T P.911 - a reference for subjective audiovisual quality assessment methods for multimedia applications.
• ITU-T P.920 - a reference for interactive test methods for audiovisual communications.
• IEC 62251 - a reference for quality assessment of audio-video communication systems.
• IEC 62312-1-1 and IEC 62312-2 - references for measuring synchronization of audio and video equipment and systems.

What does the SIST EN IEC 63478-3:2027 document contain?

The document contains a definition of the measurement scope, a terms and definitions clause, three QoE measurement models, a parameter classification table and a workflow for carrying out measurement operations. It also includes figures for the models and for the functional flow between the measurement entities.

Table 1 defines the Honeycomb attributes, Table 2 lists QoE parameters with their measurement type and mandatory or optional status, and Figure 6 shows the operational flow for QoE measurement. Annex A adds a worked example with test execution, result interpretation and recommendations, which is useful for planning tests and writing service improvement reports.

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
01-september-2025
Kakovost uporabniške izkušnje (QoE) za multimedijske konferenčne storitve - 3.
del: Merilne metode
User’s quality of experience (QoE) on multimedia conferencing services - Part 3:
Measurement methods
Qualité de l'expérience de l'usager (QoE) sur les services de conférence multimédia -
Partie 3: Méthodes de mesurage
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
ICS:
33.160.60 Večpredstavni (multimedijski) Multimedia systems and
sistemi in oprema za teleconferencing equipment
telekonference
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025 en,fr,de
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
100/4345/CDV
COMMITTEE DRAFT FOR VOTE (CDV)
PROJECT NUMBER:
IEC 63478-3 ED1
DATE OF CIRCULATION: CLOSING DATE FOR VOTING:
2025-07-18 2025-10-10
SUPERSEDES DOCUMENTS:
100/4300/CD, 100/4338/CC
IEC TC 100 : AUDIO, VIDEO AND MULTIMEDIA SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT
SECRETARIAT: SECRETARY:
Japan Ms Mahiru Uehara
OF INTEREST TO THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEES: HORIZONTAL FUNCTION(S):

ASPECTS CONCERNED:
SUBMITTED FOR CENELEC PARALLEL VOTING NOT SUBMITTED FOR CENELEC PARALLEL VOTING
Attention IEC-CENELEC parallel voting
The attention of IEC National Committees, members of
CENELEC, is drawn to the fact that this Committee Draft
for Vote (CDV) is submitted for parallel voting.
The CENELEC members are invited to vote through the
CENELEC online voting system.
This document is still under study and subject to change. It should not be used for reference purposes.
Recipients of this document are invited to submit, with their comments, notification of any relevant patent rights of
which they are aware and to provide supporting documentation.
Recipients of this document are invited to submit, with their comments, notification of any relevant “In Some
Countries” clauses to be included should this proposal proceed. Recipients are reminded that the CDV stage is
the final stage for submitting ISC clauses. (SEE AC/22/2007 OR NEW GUIDANCE DOC).

TITLE:
User’s Quality of Experience (QoE) on Multimedia Conferencing Services - Part 3:
Measurement methods
PROPOSED STABILITY DATE: 2029
NOTE FROM TC/SC OFFICERS:
electronic file, to make a copy and to print out the content for the sole purpose of preparing National Committee positions.
You may not copy or "mirror" the file or printed version of the document, or any part of it, for any other purpose without

permission in writing from IEC.

oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
1 CONTENTS
5 FOREWORD . 3
6 INTRODUCTION . 5
7 1 Scope . 6
8 2 Normative references . 6
9 3 Terms and definitions . 6
10 4 Design approach for QoE measurement . 7
11 4.1 Subjective measurement . 7
12 4.2 Objective measurement . 7
13 4.3 Hybrid measurement . 8
14 5 QoE measurement model . 8
15 5.1 Timeline rating model . 8
16 5.2 Common survey model. 9
17 5.3 Honeycomb model . 9
18 6 Measurement of QoE parameters . 11
19 6.1 General . 11
20 6.2 Video quality . 12
21 6.3 Audio quality . 12
22 6.4 Synchronization . 13
23 6.5 Accessibility . 13
24 6.6 Interoperability . 13
25 6.7 Participation . 14
26 6.8 Openness . 14
27 6.9 UI/UX . 14
28 7 Functional operations for QoE measurement . 15
29 7.1 General . 15
30 7.2 QoE Measurement Operations . 16
31 7.3 Initialization . 18
32 7.4 Monitoring . 18
33 7.5 Evaluation . 18
34 7.6 Authentication . 18
35 7.7 Data management . 18
36 8 Presentation of QoE measurement results . 18
37 8.1 General . 18
38 8.2 Quantitative representation using tables and charts . 19
39 8.3 Qualitative representation using report-based analysis . 19
40 8.4 QoE model-based representation . 19
41 Annex A (informative) Example of QoE measurement of multimedia conferencing
42 services . 20
43 A.1 Introduction . 20
44 A.2 Measurement methods . 20
45 A.3 Test execution . 20
46 A.4 Results and recommendations . 21
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
47 A.5 Conclusion . 21
48 Bibliography . 22
50 Figure 1 – Timeline rating model . 7
51 Figure 2 – Simple survey example of Common Survey model . 8
52 Figure 3 – Honeycomb model . 9
53 Figure 4 – QoE measurement service functional blocks . 14
54 Figure 5 – Interworking between functional entities for QoE measurement . 15
55 Figure 6 – Operational flows for QoE measurement . 16
57 Table 1 – Attributes of Honeycomb model . 8
58 Table 2 – List of QoE parameters. 10
59 Table A.1 – QoE factors and measurement methods . 19
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
62 INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION
63 ____________
65 USER’S QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE ON MULTIMEDIA CONFERENCING
66 SERVICES
68 Part 3: Measurement methods
72 FOREWORD
73 1) The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) is a worldwide organization for standardization comprising
74 all national electrotechnical committees (IEC National Committees). The object of IEC is to promote international
75 co-operation on all questions concerning standardization in the electrical and electronic fields. To this end and
76 in addition to other activities, IEC publishes International Standards, Technical Specifications, Technical Reports,
77 Publicly Available Specifications (PAS) and Guides (hereafter referred to as "IEC Publication(s)"). Their
78 preparation is entrusted to technical committees; any IEC National Committee interested in the subject dealt with
79 may participate in this preparatory work. International, governmental and non-governmental organizations liaising
80 with the IEC also participate in this preparation. IEC collaborates closely with the International Organization for
81 Standardization (ISO) in accordance with conditions determined by agreement between the two organizations.
82 2) The formal decisions or agreements of IEC on technical matters express, as nearly as possible, an international
83 consensus of opinion on the relevant subjects since each technical committee has representation from all
84 interested IEC National Committees.
85 3) IEC Publications have the form of recommendations for international use and are accepted by IEC National
86 Committees in that sense. While all reasonable efforts are made to ensure that the technical content of IEC
87 Publications is accurate, IEC cannot be held responsible for the way in which they are used or for any
88 misinterpretation by any end user.
89 4) In order to promote international uniformity, IEC National Committees undertake to apply IEC Publications
90 transparently to the maximum extent possible in their national and regional publications. Any divergence between
91 any IEC Publication and the corresponding national or regional publication shall be clearly indicated in the latter.
92 5) IEC itself does not provide any attestation of conformity. Independent certification bodies provide conformity
93 assessment services and, in some areas, access to IEC marks of conformity. IEC is not responsible for any
94 services carried out by independent certification bodies.
95 6) All users should ensure that they have the latest edition of this publication.
96 7) No liability shall attach to IEC or its directors, employees, servants or agents including individual experts and
97 members of its technical committees and IEC National Committees for any personal injury, property damage or
98 other damage of any nature whatsoever, whether direct or indirect, or for costs (including legal fees) and
99 expenses arising out of the publication, use of, or reliance upon, this IEC Publication or any other IEC
100 Publications.
101 8) Attention is drawn to the Normative references cited in this publication. Use of the referenced publications is
102 indispensable for the correct application of this publication.
103 9) IEC draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use of (a)
104 patent(s). IEC takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed patent rights in
105 respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, IEC had not received notice of (a) patent(s), which
106 may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are cautioned that this may not represent
107 the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent database available at https://patents.iec.ch. IEC
108 shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
109 IEC 63478-3 has been prepared by subcommittee WG 11: USER’S QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE
110 (QoE) ON MULTIMEDIA CONFERENCING SERVICES, of IEC technical committee TC 100:
111 AUDIO, VIDEO AND MULTIMEDIA SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT. It is an International
112 Standard.
113 The text of this International Standard is based on the following documents:
Draft Report on voting
XX/XX/FDIS XX/XX/RVD
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
115 Full information on the voting for its approval can be found in the report on voting indicated in
116 the above table.
117 The language used for the development of this International Standard is English.
118 This document was drafted in accordance with ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2, and developed in
119 accordance with ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1 and ISO/IEC Directives, IEC Supplement available
120 at www.iec.ch/members_experts/refdocs. The main document types developed by IEC are
121 described in greater detail at www.iec.ch/publications.
122 The committee has decided that the contents of this document will remain unchanged until the
123 stability date indicated on the IEC website under webstore.iec.ch in the data related to the
124 specific document. At this date, the document will be
125 • reconfirmed,
126 • withdrawn,
127 • replaced by a revised edition, or
128 • amended.
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
130 INTRODUCTION
131 With the global COVID-19 pandemic, the meetings on business and education have shifted from
132 offline to online modes. Consequently, a range of multimedia conferencing services has been
133 developed, enabling users to choose and enjoy conferencing services based on personal
134 preferences. To ensure optimal user experience, it is essential to measure the Quality of
135 Experience (QoE) for multimedia conferencing services. However, there is currently a lack of
136 standardized methods for measuring a user's QoE in this context. Thus, there is a pressing
137 need to provide guidelines for measuring and evaluating a user's QoE for multimedia
138 conferencing services.
139 Traditionally, Quality of Service (QoS) has been measured for network data communication,
140 represented by objective index values like delay, throughput, and jitter. In contrast, QoE
141 represents a user's level of satisfaction with a specific service and reflects human emotional
142 quality. As such, QoE is subject to overall service performance from the user's perspective. In
143 the case of multimedia conferencing services, measuring QoE is challenging due to varying
144 user preferences/requirements and service/application characteristics. Therefore, a unified
145 framework is necessary to measure and evaluate a user's QoE for multimedia conferencing
146 services.
147 This document (IEC 63478) aims to provide guidelines for enhancing a user's QoE for
148 multimedia conferencing services. The series specifies general considerations and
149 requirements to enhance a user's QoE and measurement methods for associated QoE
150 parameters.
151 The IEC 63478 consists of the following parts:
152 - Part 1: General;
153 - Part 2: Requirements; and
154 - Part 3: Measurement methods.
155 Part 1 of IEC 63478-1 (Technical Report) describes general considerations to measure user's
156 QoE.
157 Part 2 of IEC 63478-2 (International Standard) describes the requirements to be considered to
158 measure user's QoE.
159 Part 3 of IEC 63478-3 (International Standard) describes the measurement methods for QoE
160 parameters.
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
162 USER’S QUALITY OF EXPERIENCE ON MULTIMEDIA CONFERENCING
163 SERVICES
165 Part 3: Measurement methods
169 1 Scope
170 This part of IEC 63478-3 describes the measurement methods for user’s Quality of Experience
171 (QoE) parameters on multimedia conferencing services.
172 2 Normative references
173 The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
174 constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies.
175 For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any
176 amendments) applies.
177 IEC 63478-2, User’s Quality of Experience (QoE) on Multimedia Conferencing Services – Part
178 2: Requirements
179 3 Terms and definitions
180 For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
181 ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following
182 addresses:
183 • IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/
184 • ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp
185 3.1
186 API
187 Application Programming Interface
188 3.2
189 MCC
190 Multimedia Conferencing Client
191 3.3
192 MCS
193 Multimedia Conferencing Server
194 3.4
195 QMA
196 QoE Measurement Agent
197 3.5
198 QMM
199 QoE Measurement Manager
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
200 3.6
201 QoE
202 Quality of Experience
203 3.7
204 SDK
205 Software Development Kit
206 3.8
207 UI/UX
208 User Interface / User eXperience
209 4 Design approach for QoE measurement
210 4.1 Subjective measurement
211 Subjective measurement approach to measure QoE in multimedia conferencing services
212 involves obtaining feedback directly from users about their perception of the quality of the
213 conference. Here are some of the commonly used subjective approach to measure QoE:
214 • Surveys
215 Surveys are a common subjective approach to measure QoE. Participants are asked to rate
216 their overall experience of the multimedia conferencing service, including audio and video
217 quality, ease of use, and reliability.
218 • Focus groups
219 Focus groups are another subjective approach that involves gathering a group of users to
220 discuss their experiences with the multimedia conferencing service. Participants share their
221 opinions, feedback, and suggestions about the service.
222 • Interviews
223 Interviews with individual users provide in-depth insights into their experience with the
224 multimedia conferencing service. Participants provide feedback on specific aspects of the
225 service, such as audio quality, video quality, or user interface.
226 • User diaries
227 User diaries involve asking users to keep a record of their experiences with the multimedia
228 conferencing service over a period of time. Participants record their perceptions of the
229 service, any issues they encounter, and suggestions for improvement.
230 • User ratings
231 User ratings can be obtained by asking users to rate specific aspects of the multimedia
232 conferencing service, such as audio and video quality, ease of use, and reliability. These
233 ratings can be used to calculate an overall QoE score.
234 4.2 Objective measurement
235 The objective measurement approach is a QoE measurement method that uses technical
236 parameters and measurements to evaluate the quality of multimedia services. This approach
237 focuses on quantifiable metrics such as delay, jitter, packet loss, and bitrate to assess the
238 quality of the service.
239 Here are some of the commonly used objective approach to measure QoE:
240 • Objective assessment
241 This approach involves collecting objective data about the service, such as network latency,
242 packet loss, and other technical parameters. This data is then analysed to determine the
243 quality of the service.
244 • QoE metrics
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
245 These are standardized metrics used to measure QoE, such as Mean Opinion Score (MOS),
246 which is a measure of the overall quality of the service based on user ratings.
247 • Behavioural analysis
248 This approach involves analysing user behaviours to determine the quality of the service.
249 For example, user engagement and participation in a meeting can be used as indicators of
250 the quality of the service.
251 • Automated testing
252 This approach involves using automated tools to simulate user behaviour and measure the
253 QoE of the service. This can be useful for testing the service under different network
254 conditions and user scenarios.
255 4.3 Hybrid measurement
256 The hybrid measurement approach combines both subjective and objective measurement
257 approaches to evaluate the QoE of multimedia services. This approach is often used to provide
258 a more accurate and comprehensive evaluation of the QoE, as it combines the benefits of both
259 approaches. The hybrid approach involves collecting both objective and subjective data, then
260 using statistical methods to analyze and compare the data to arrive at a QoE score.
261 5 QoE measurement model
262 5.1 Timeline rating model
263 The timeline rating model is a QoE measurement model that involves measuring QoE parameter
264 values at different stages of multimedia conferencing, namely before, during, and after the
265 conference. It is essential to determine the appropriate timing for each QoE parameter to be
266 measured. Factors such as user age, device type, purpose of use, and communication
267 environment are crucial for QoE measurement before the conference. These factors are
268 gathered before the QoE parameter aggregation service begins and the user starts using the
269 service. During the conference, video quality, audio quality, and network status can be
270 measured. After the conference, the user's overall satisfaction level or opinion can be measured.
272 Figure 1 – Timeline rating model
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
273 5.2 Common survey model
274 In the common survey model, the MCS measures the management information to provide
275 multimedia conferencing services to the MCC. For example, these include service type, the
276 number of users and traffic.
277 On the other hand, the MCC uses the Timeline rating model which is a subjective approach
278 used to measure the quality of multimedia conferencing services. In this model, users are asked
279 to rate the quality of the service on a fixed scale, such as a 5-point or 7-point scale. Users are
280 usually presented with a stimulus, such as a video or audio clip, and are asked to rate the
281 quality of the stimulus based on a specific attribute, such as video quality, audio quality, or
282 overall quality.
284 Figure 2 – Simple survey example of Common Survey model
285 5.3 Honeycomb model
286 The Honeycomb model can be used to evaluate the QoE of a multimedia conferencing service
287 by examining how well it satisfies the following seven attributes as described in Table 1.
288 Table 1 – Attributes of Honeycomb model
Attribute Description
Useful How much the service can give satisfaction in the viewpoint of the service purposes
Usable How much the service can be usable
Findable How much easily users can find the information they want in the service duration
Credible How much the multimedia service can be trusted as a stable service
Desirable How much the service is desirable for users
Accessible How well the service accommodates users with different needs
Valuable How much the service is valuable for users
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
289 By measuring these attributes using various techniques such as surveys, usability testing, user
290 feedback, and analytics, service providers can evaluate the QoE of their multimedia
291 conferencing service and identify areas for improvement.
293 Figure 3 – Honeycomb model
294 • Useful
295 The usefulness of the multimedia conferencing service can be measured by evaluating how
296 well it meets the needs of the users. This can be done through user surveys or by analyzing
297 user behaviours and interaction with the service.
298 • Usable
299 The usability of the service can be measured by evaluating how easy it is for users to
300 navigate and perform tasks within the service. This can be done through usability testing
301 and user feedback.
302 • Findable
303 The findability of the service can be measured by evaluating how easily users can find what
304 they are looking for within the service. This can be done through search engine optimization
305 and user testing.
306 • Credible
307 The credibility of the service can be measured by evaluating the accuracy and
308 trustworthiness of the information and content provided by the service. This can be done
309 through user feedback and third-party reviews.
310 • Desirable
311 The desirability of the service can be measured by evaluating how attractive and appealing
312 it is to users. This can be done through user surveys and aesthetic evaluations.
313 • Accessible
314 The accessibility of the service can be measured by evaluating how well it accommodates
315 users with disabilities and different needs. This can be done through accessibility testing
316 and user feedback.
317 • Valuable
318 The value of the service can be measured by evaluating the benefits that it provides to users.
319 This can be done through user surveys and analysis of user behaviours.
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
320 6 Measurement of QoE parameters
321 6.1 General
322 For QoE measurement, the following QoE parameters are considered in Table 2.
323 Table 2 – List of QoE parameters
QoE parameter QoE factor Type Mandatory/Optional
Visual clarity Hybrid Mandatory
Video quality
Latency Objective Mandatory
Clarity Subjective Mandatory
Noise Subjective Mandatory
Audio quality Latency Objective Mandatory
Dynamic range Objective
Echo cancellation Objective
Accuracy Hybrid Mandatory
Synchronization Adaptive Objective
Consistency Objective
Support for assistive technologies Objective Mandatory
Accessibility Compatibility with assistive devices Objective
Captioning and transcription Objective Mandatory
Cross-platform compatibility Objective Mandatory
Interoperability Integration with other services Objective Mandatory
Security Objective Mandatory
User group size Objective Mandatory
Participation
Collaboration tools Objective Mandatory
Transparency Objective
Openness
Open API/SDK Objective
Intuitive and user-friendly design Subjective Mandatory
Consistency across platforms Hybrid
UI/UX
Customizability Objective
Feedback and notifications Objective Mandatory
324 To measure the user QoE of a multimedia conferencing service, various QoE parameters need
325 to be considered, which are described in detail in Part 2 of the document. An additional
326 consideration for measurement is Type, which refers to the subjective and/or objective
327 approach to measuring a specific QoE factor. Subjective measurements are based on user
328 feedback, while objective measurements are based on quantitative measurements of
329 multimedia conferencing services or whether specific features are provided.
oSIST prEN IEC 63478-3:2025
IEC CDV 63478-3 © IEC 2025
330 6.2 Video quality
331 Video quality is a critical factor in multimedia conferencing services, and is determined by the
332 visual clarity of the video stream and the smoothness of the stream relati
...