Re: PLEASE READ: Requirements discussion priority

Thanks for pointing this out.  The results are, as you have no doubt  
noticed, public.

There are times when W3C tools can be useful, and this is one of  
them.  My intent was not to limit participation to members, but rather  
to use a survey that accepted one reply from each organization since  
that often provides a better representation of industry interest.  I  
appreciate David Bolter's indication of support for your answers since  
he is also from the same organization.

I apologize for any confusion this might have caused.  I will actively  
seek other tools that can help with polls such as these without  
introducing an unproductive bias towards organizations with many  
participating members.  In the future I might use the W3C survey tools  
again; if so, I will make clear how non-Members can provide their  
input (e.g., in email as you did).

-- dan

On Oct 15, 2010, at 12:56 PM, Olli Pettay wrote:

> On 10/11/2010 02:01 PM, Dan Burnett wrote:
>> Group,
>>
>> As Michael asked I have created a survey [1] to assess interest (by
>> Organization) in discussing each of the requirements in Michael's
>> document. There have been some minor suggestions on the email list to
>> adjust the requirements (e.g., R8) -- please take these into account
>> when filling out the survey.
>>
>> The purpose of the survey is to help us determine which  
>> requirements are
>> of interest to the greatest number of participating organizations to
>> help us focus the discussion.
>>
>> The survey is open through Wednesday of this week. If you expect to  
>> need
>> more time let me know.
> Sorry, I missed the questionnaire deadline.
> Any chance to keep it open for a day or two?
> If not, I'll answer in an email.
>
> Though, charter says "All technical work in this group will be  
> conducted on the public mailing list public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org and  
> at any scheduled teleconferences and face-to-face meetings." So we  
> shouldn't IMO use members-only questionnaires.
>
>
> -Olli
>
>
>>
>> -- dan
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/45260/ReqPri01/
>>
>>
>> On Oct 4, 2010, at 6:55 AM, Michael Bodell wrote:
>>
>>> I've now taken the original collated list of 70 use cases and
>>> requirements from
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2010Sep/0051.html
>>> and created a first draft of a document that combines like use cases
>>> and requirements and organizes the remaining 15 use cases and 34
>>> requirements into different related sections. I've also (generously)
>>> linked the requirements back to the use cases that support them. For
>>> contribution I also took the style of the VBWG (everyone listed in  
>>> the
>>> editors section, not a separate editors and authors section),
>>> appologies in advance if I missed someone, I took the people who  
>>> were
>>> linked in the earlier collation above (and I wasn't sure what the
>>> organization was for the two people who aren't members of the XG).
>>>
>>> As always, if there are some use cases or requirements that could be
>>> made more clear or added, that would be great.
>>>
>>> For a next step I've asked Dan to consider running a poll that will
>>> help us prioritize the use cases and requirements so we can start by
>>> focusing the discussion on the use cases and requirements that have
>>> the highest priority.
>>> <speech.html>
>>
>
>

Received on Friday, 22 October 2010 00:04:44 UTC