On Jun 5, 2009, at 03:05, Jonas Sicking wrote: > But I will note that I also pointed out the need to gather data. It's > easy to have an opinion, but we won't know whose opinion is right > until we get some data. > > @summary has been specified for over 10 years, so there should be > plenty of data out there to show if it has been a good idea or not. > Wouldn't you agree? I think the best data collection suggestion so far was made by Philip Taylor on IRC yesterday: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090604#l-1058 Of course, it wouldn't help unless people agree on a cut-off point. E.g. whether a feature is a failure if the revealed preference of 80% of the sample of the constituency is to route around the feature? 50%, 90%, 99%? It's also possible that the answer isn't a boolean listens to summary / doesn't listen to summary but depends on the page in which case it would be most interesting to find out how a user decides before listening to the summary whether to listen for it. In general, yesterday's IRC log from http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090604#l-701 onwards is relevant on this topic. Especially: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090604#l-757 through http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090604#l-764 http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090604#l-807 http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090604#l-1028 http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090604#l-1046 http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20090604#l-1062 -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/Received on Friday, 5 June 2009 08:28:15 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 5 June 2009 08:28:16 GMT