W3C WBS Home

Results of Questionnaire EOWG Review: Business Case slides

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email address: shawn@w3.org

This questionnaire was open from 2011-06-25 to 2011-08-17.

15 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Support for publishing the slides and instruction page
  2. Comments on the Slides
  3. Which version of the slides are you commenting on?
  4. Comments on the Instructions page

1. Support for publishing the slides and instruction page

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
I support publishing them as is 11
I support publishing them; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion now or for a later revision) 3
I support publishing them only with the changes indicated as [important to be addressed before publication] in the comments section below 1
I do not support publishing them because of the comments indicated as [important to be addressed before publication] in the comments section below
I abstain (not vote)

Details

Responder Support for publishing the slides and instruction page
Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo I support publishing them as is
Liam McGee I support publishing them as is
Vicki Menezes Miller I support publishing them as is
Jennifer Sutton I support publishing them as is
Shadi Abou-Zahra I support publishing them only with the changes indicated as [important to be addressed before publication] in the comments section below
Wayne Dick I support publishing them as is
Sharron Rush I support publishing them as is
Helle Bjarnø I support publishing them as is
Denis Boudreau I support publishing them; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion now or for a later revision)
Cliff Tyllick I support publishing them; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion now or for a later revision)
Char James-Tanny I support publishing them as is
Ian Pouncey I support publishing them as is
Sylvie Duchateau I support publishing them as is
Andrew Arch I support publishing them; however, I suggest the changes in the comments section below (for editors' discretion now or for a later revision)
Jason Bell I support publishing them as is

2. Comments on the Slides

For the ppt slides themselves -- remember to include priority, location, suggested revision, and rationale for each comment.)

Details

Responder Comments on the Slides
Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo
Liam McGee
Vicki Menezes Miller 1. Graphic "Money tree"
It's much better now that the squiggle has gone and it has been reduced in size.
Thanks

Jennifer Sutton The only odd thing I noticed is that the language seeme to change within the first "todo" slide, but since I presume that'll eventually be deleted, it shouldn't be a problem. It seemed to switch to UK English. Let me know if you need the words, but I don't imagine you will. No need to comment on this comment which pertains to Slide One of the PPT.
Shadi Abou-Zahra # [important] slide 5: I'm a bit unsure about the implications of this definition for accessibility -- is it *about* or does it *benefit* people with and without disabilities? This seems more of a definition for inclusion rather than for accessibility.

# [editors discretion] slide 3: consider using "in this presentation ..." rather than "for the next @@ minutes ..." because people may want to use these slides for presentations of different lengths.

# [editors discretion] slide 14: consider a different separator because it is already the title of the entire slideset, and consider reducing the (over)use of "smart business" throughout (slides 3, 5, 14, and 35 -- maybe remove from slide 3 too?)
Wayne Dick The money tree is too green, but that's just me.

The slides are really good. They give the presenter plenty to build on. I could use those slides with comfort.

I enlarged the notes and they are good.
Sharron Rush
Helle Bjarnø
Denis Boudreau I think it's very good as it is now and I feel confident it could be published as is.

Revert slide no5 to the july 23rd version.
Cliff Tyllick Although I have not seen the 23 July version, I understand the thoughts others have expressed about its superiority to this version. I feel comfortable supporting the publication of that version of the slides.
Char James-Tanny
Ian Pouncey We should be on the look out for a (real!) business quote for slide 5, but I am happy for it to be published as is.

Also be aware that pictures of technology (such as the phone on slide 19) age quickly, if possible this should be reviewed and updated regularly (editors discretion only, doesn't need group review).
Sylvie Duchateau
Andrew Arch Slide 10 - Ageing Population
Notes say "However, it is derived from the following real data"
Consider adding the country/region this data applies to, and the source

Slide 34 - Your Own Business Case
reconsider right justified bullets - harder to read than left-justification
Jason Bell

3. Which version of the slides are you commenting on?

summary | by responder | by choice

The version is on the title slide (currently 3) after "Status":
Status: Draft Updated 00 Month 2011

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
date not listed here, put in comments below
early July
21 July 2011 3
25 July 2011 5
29 July 2011 5
12 August 2011

(2 responses didn't contain an answer to this question)

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder Which version of the slides are you commenting on?Comments
Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo
Liam McGee
Vicki Menezes Miller
  • 21 July 2011
Jennifer Sutton
  • 21 July 2011
Shadi Abou-Zahra
  • 25 July 2011
Wayne Dick
  • 25 July 2011
These notes are a good collection of slides to start a lecture. There is sufficient material to prevent starting from scratch, and enough room to add your own material.

I strongly support the document.
Sharron Rush
  • 25 July 2011
Helle Bjarnø
  • 21 July 2011
Denis Boudreau
  • 25 July 2011
Revert slide 5 to 23rd version
Cliff Tyllick
  • 25 July 2011
This is a much-improved presentation. I support publishing it.
Char James-Tanny
  • 29 July 2011
Ian Pouncey
  • 29 July 2011
Sylvie Duchateau
  • 29 July 2011
Andrew Arch
  • 29 July 2011
Jason Bell
  • 29 July 2011

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
date not listed here, put in comments below
early July
21 July 2011
  • Vicki Menezes Miller
  • Jennifer Sutton
  • Helle Bjarnø
25 July 2011
  • Shadi Abou-Zahra
  • Wayne Dick
  • Sharron Rush
  • Denis Boudreau
  • Cliff Tyllick
29 July 2011
  • Char James-Tanny
  • Ian Pouncey
  • Sylvie Duchateau
  • Andrew Arch
  • Jason Bell
12 August 2011

4. Comments on the Instructions page

For the Instructions page -- remember to include priority, location, suggested revision, and rationale for each comment.)

Details

Responder Comments on the Instructions page
Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo
Liam McGee
Vicki Menezes Miller
Jennifer Sutton
Shadi Abou-Zahra # [important] intro: only publish when HTML version is available
# [important] intro: PPT version now significantly more than 8MB
# [important] permission and reference: we are on 2011 already... ;)

# [editors discretion] advice for presenters: consider removing "We might add to this page a list of presentations that other people developed based on this one" for now until we have discussed and agreed to a transparent set of criteria for linking to such presentations *from this page*.

# [editors discretion] throughout: can we reduce the amount of advice, some of which is already redundant with the "Presentations" page? Just seems too long...
Wayne Dick
Sharron Rush
Helle Bjarnø
Denis Boudreau I think it's very good as it is now, feel confident it could be published as is. It is helpful enough for anyone who knows what he or she is talking about.
Cliff Tyllick
Char James-Tanny
Ian Pouncey
Sylvie Duchateau
Andrew Arch
Jason Bell

More details on responses

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
  2. Eric Velleman <evelleman@bartimeus.nl>
  3. Roberto Castaldo <r.castaldo@webprofession.com>
  4. Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
  5. Brian Stonebridge <brian.stonebridge@agimo.gov.au>
  6. Pasquale Popolizio <p.popolizio@webprofession.com>
  7. Swaran Lata <slata@mit.gov.in>
  8. Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org>
  9. Massimiliano Navacchia <massimiliano@navacchia.it>
  10. Bim Egan <bim.egan1@gmail.com>
  11. Scott Hollier <scott.hollier@mediaaccess.org.au>
  12. Wilco Fiers <w.fiers@accessibility.nl>
  13. Somnath Chandra <Schandra@mit.gov.in>
  14. Reinaldo Ferraz <reinaldo@nic.br>
  15. Jonathan Metz <jonathanmetz@gmail.com>
  16. Howard Kramer <hkramer@colorado.edu>
  17. Anna Belle Leiserson <ableiserson@gmail.com>
  18. Paul Schantz <paul.schantz@csun.edu>
  19. Vivienne Conway <v.conway@webkeyit.com>
  20. Jan McSorley <jan.mcsorley@pearson.com>
  21. Monique Viengkhou <monique.viengkhou@hp.com>
  22. Anthony Fernando <anthony.fernando@pearson.com>
  23. Kevin White <kevin@w3.org>
  24. Lydia Harkey <LHarkey@suddenlink.net>
  25. Brent Bakken <brent.bakken@pearson.com>

Send an email to all the non-responders.


Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire


Completed and maintained by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org) on an original design by Michael Sperberg-McQueen $Id: showv.php3,v 1.124 2014-10-06 13:46:23 dom Exp $. Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to dom@w3.org with w3t-sys@w3.org copied (if your mail client supports it, send mail directly to the right persons)