W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wsc-wg@w3.org > May 2007

RE: Recommendation template (Was: Editing process for Recommendations)

From: Close, Tyler J. <tyler.close@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 22:34:25 -0000
Message-ID: <08CA2245AFCF444DB3AC415E47CC40AFB18B0F@G3W0072.americas.hpqcorp.net>
To: <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
Thanks Mike. Please go ahead and start using this template.
 
Tyler



________________________________

	From: michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com
[mailto:michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com] 
	Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 2:43 PM
	To: Close, Tyler J.; Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com
	Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
	Subject: RE: Recommendation template (Was: Editing process for
Recommendations)
	
	
	I converted Tyler's display recommendation template into a wiki
page.  It's a sub page of the Display Recommendation Proposals at
http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/wiki/RecommendationDisplayProposals/RecoTempl
.
	 
	Please review and update as needed before I/we start using it.
	 
	Thanks, Mike

________________________________

	From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Close, Tyler J.
	Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 7:02 PM
	To: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
	Subject: RE: Recommendation template (Was: Editing process for
Recommendations)
	
	
	Yes, a standalone wiki page is fine.
	 
	Tyler


________________________________

		From: Mary Ellen Zurko
[mailto:Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com] 
		Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 3:53 PM
		To: michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com
		Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org; Close, Tyler J.;
sduffy@aol.net
		Subject: RE: Recommendation template (Was: Editing
process for Recommendations)
		
		

		Tyler and Shawn, is that how you want them? I would
assume so, in the face of silence. 
		
		          Mez
		
		Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office       (t/l
333-6389)
		Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation
Architect
		
		
		
		
<michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com> 

05/04/2007 11:04 AM

To
<Mary_Ellen_Zurko@notesdev.ibm.com>, <tyler.close@hp.com> 
cc
<public-wsc-wg@w3.org> 
Subject
RE: Recommendation template (Was: Editing process for Recommendations)	

		




		It looks reasonable.  I'll try using it and then may
have more feedback.
		 
		Should each Recommendation be a standalone wiki page,
linked to from the current Display Recommendations page?
		
		
________________________________

		From: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mary Ellen Zurko
		Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 8:21 AM
		To: tyler.close@hp.com
		Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
		Subject: Re: Recommendation template (Was: Editing
process for Recommendations)
		
		
		Great structure for discussions; doing this will help us
proceed quite well.
		
		As I said during the meeting, I  specifically want to
hear from anyone doing a lightening discussion proposal about this
template; if they agree it's a good one (since they'll be filling it
out), or what changes should be made.  
		
		         Mez
		
		Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office       (t/l
333-6389)
		Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation
Architect
		
		
		
"Close, Tyler J." <tyler.close@hp.com> 
Sent by: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org 

05/02/2007 01:25 PM



To
<public-wsc-wg@w3.org> 
cc
Subject
Recommendation template (Was: Editing process for Recommendations)	


		


		
		
		
		
		Here's a stake in the ground for our recommendation
proposal template.
		
		--- Begin template ---
		
		Title
		  Each proposal must have a short name by which we can
refer to it.
		
		Goals
		  Each proposal must reference the WG Goals
	
<http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/note/Overview.html#goals> the
		proposal helps achieve.
		
		Overview
		  Each proposal must provide a brief overview of the
problem it
		addresses and general approach being proposed to fix the
problem. This
		section should reference the usability principles
	
<http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/note/Overview.html#usability-principl
		es> violated by the current approach, as well as any
usability
		principles that will be upheld by the proposal.
		
		Dependencies
		  Each proposal must reference the Available security
information
	
<http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/note/Overview.html#available> it
		relies upon. (I'll add anchors to the Note that can be
the target of
		hyperlinks).
		
		Use-cases
		  Each proposal must reference the use-cases
	
<http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/drafts/note/Overview.html#scenarios> it
		addresses. This section must provide more detailed
description of
		exactly how the user will interact with the proposed
user interface. The
		details provided in this section must be sufficient to
enable
		lo-fidelity testing of the proposal.
		
		Expected user behavior
		  Each proposal must discuss the user behavior it relies
upon and that
		therefore must be tested. Each item should refer back to
a step in the
		"Use-cases" section of the proposal. For example, a
proposal might rely
		on the user reacting in a given way to a specified
indicator. The
		proposal must call out what the needed user reaction is,
as well as what
		user reactions might be detrimental to the user's
interests. For each
		item, the proposal should list the motivations for the
user to react in
		the desired way as well as any factors that reduce the
user's motivation
		to react in this way.
		
		Disruption
		  Each proposal should list any significant disruptions
it makes to
		current user habits for web browsing. This section
should help the
		reader understand what issues might cause the proposal
to not be
		deployed, despite advantages it may have.
		
		--- End template ---
		
		I think the above template gives us the information we
need to evaluate
		a proposal and proceed with testing and implementation.
I realize that
		the template asks for a lot of content from the author
and so we might
		not get complete documents for many of the proposals by
the F2F, but I
		think that's OK. At least we'll know what we don't know.
		
		This email addresses ACTION-212.
		
		Tyler
		
		
		
		
		
Received on Friday, 11 May 2007 22:35:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 5 February 2008 03:52:47 GMT