W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > March 2013

[webappsec] WG survey results

From: Hill, Brad <bhill@paypal-inc.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 19:58:51 +0000
To: "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>
Message-ID: <370C9BEB4DD6154FA963E2F79ADC6F2E2795621B@DEN-EXDDA-S12.corp.ebay.com>
Thanks to the nine of you who took the survey!

I've listed the results below, and will think about and try to figure out  how to act on this for our next call.  Suggestions to the list are welcome.

-Brad Hill



Overall, how satisfied are you with the WebAppSec WG?
-------------------------------------
Very Satisfied 					11.11% 		1 
Satisfied 					77.78% 		7 
Indifferent 					11.11% 		1 
Dissatisfied 					0% 		0 
Very Dissatisfied 				0%  		0

I participate in the WG in the following ways:
-------------------------------------
Teleconferences				66.67%		6
Teleconferences (IRC only)			11.11%		1
public-webappsec mailing list			77.78%		7
public-webappsec mailing list (read only)	22.22%		2
Face to Face meetings				22.22%		2
Editing documents				11.11%		1
Contributing test cases				0%		0
Reviewing documents				44.44%		4
I do not participate				0%		0

I do not participate in the WG because:
-------------------------------------
Issues are not relevant to my interests		33.33%		1
Teleconferences at an inconvenient time	66.67%		2
Cost of dialing-in to teleconference		0%		0
Tone of mailing list is unwelcoming		0%		0
Face to Face meetings inconvenient		0%		0

The following would increase my engagement with the WG:
-------------------------------------
New /different deliverables			50%		2
More opportunities to edit / contribute text	0%		0
Better tool chain for test cases			25%		1
Better documentation for test cases		25%		1
Improved moderation / tone on list		0%		0
Improved moderation/ tone on calls		0%		0
Better tooling for action / issue/ bug tracking	25%		1
Other:
"Better web view of really long email threads. Also summaries on the call, since the threads can get too long."


I feel the WG is:
-------------------------------------
Too focused on user-agent implementers' concerns		12.5%	1
Too focused on editors' concerns				0%	0
Too focused on resource owners' concerns			0%	0
Too focused on end-users' concerns				0%	0
Appropriately balanced in its treatment of constituencies	87.5%	7


Overall, how satisfied are you with the chairs of the WG?
-------------------------------------
Very satisfied					87.5%	7
Satisfied					12.5%	1
Indifferent					0%	0
Dissatisfied					0%	0
Very dissatisfied				0%	0

The editors and chairs treat my concerns and comments appropriately:
-------------------------------------
Yes						75%	6
Most of the time				25%	2
No						0%	0

The chairs ensure that other concerns like privacy are appropriately managed:
-------------------------------------
Yes						100%	6
No						0%	0

Where could the WG most improve?
-------------------------------------
I am satisfied with the WG			71.43%		5
Specifications progress too slowly		14.29% 		1
Test suites progress too slowly			14.29%		1
Meeting agendas are not sent timely		14.29%		1

How do you feel about the teleconference?
-------------------------------------
Satisfied					57.14%		4
Too frequent					14.29%		1
Not frequent enough				0%		0
Too much time on tracker			28.57%		2
Poor participation etiquette			0%		0
Other:								2
						
"No time for general discussion or brainstorming about what else we can do to improve web security. Or share recent ideas and see what other experts in the working group think."
"good. But timing is a bit difficult in Asia time zone"
Received on Wednesday, 6 March 2013 19:59:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:00 UTC