W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-geo@w3.org > July 2005

RE: Working survey test: please comment

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:09:07 +0100
To: "'Martin Duerst'" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "'GEO'" <public-i18n-geo@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20050715100906.4E4804EFE3@homer.w3.org>

> From: Martin Duerst [mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp] 
> Sent: 15 July 2005 09:48
> To: Richard Ishida; GEO
> Subject: Re: Working survey test: please comment

> I tried it. I input some nonsense as a comment, and then 
> pressed return to add another line, but that nonsense comment 
> got sent out. This was unexpected.

So that was you!  I'd appreciate it if anyone testing this would identify
themselves ;-)

> Also, the responding form told me that I had rated the thing 
> as 5, although I had never selected any of the buttons, and 
> none of them were labeled as '5'. 

It says '/5', ie. no score out of 5. I should improve that. Thanks.

> For serious comments, the 
> space is much too small. But I don't see that we should make 
> it bigger, otherwise it looks too important.

Yes. It's not ideal, but the best compromise we could think of for now.

> Having it at the end of a long page may mean that it's 
> overlooked by a lot of people. For long pages, maybe we could 
> put it at the start and at the end. Or maybe it could be floating?

Yes we discussed this. We are thinking of linking to it from the top of the
page, but the point you really need it is after having read the article, and
it is best placed for that where it is.  (As it happens, there are also
practical space issues that arise if we put at the top.)

>  >Please let me have your thoughts. (Yes you can test it if 
> you want, though  >please put comments in an email to GEO.) I 
> was a bit naughty and changed  >some things after our 
> discussion on the telecon.  Do you think it's ok like  >that? 
>  I think it is really useful to know a minimum about the 
> person  >scoring the page.
> Of course it's really useful. But what about having that 
> after the comment, and somehow indicating that it's not required?
> Some people may not want to comment if they think that they 
> have to submit personal info.

Again, we discussed pros and cons here during telecon.  The submitted
information is much less useful if we don't have an idea who is submitting
it, and that iformation is actually likely on the whole more useful and more
readily supplied than short comments.  I think that if someone is really
worried about privacy they can easily ignore the field or put something very
general.  Usually forms indicate what is required, rather than what is not

Thanks for the comments!

> Regards,    Martin.
Received on Friday, 15 July 2005 10:09:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:03 UTC