Re: PF Response: @Summary

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 08:28:20 UTC