The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody.
This questionnaire was open from 2010-11-12 to 2010-11-24.
8 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results | |
| I support publishing it as a Draft as is | 4 |
| I support publishing it as a Draft; however, I suggest the changes in the comments sections below (for editors' discretion) | 1 |
| I support publishing it as a Draft only with the changes in the comments sections below | |
| I do not support publishing it as a Draft, because of the comments in the comments sections below | |
| I abstain (not vote) | 3 |
| Responder | Support for publishing and announcing the page as a draft for public review: |
|---|---|
| Shawn Henry | I support publishing it as a Draft as is |
| Sharron Rush | I support publishing it as a Draft as is |
| Helle Bjarnø | I abstain (not vote) |
| Jack Welsh | I abstain (not vote) |
| Sandi Wassmer | I abstain (not vote) |
| Eric Eggert | I support publishing it as a Draft as is |
| Kate Roberts | I support publishing it as a Draft as is |
| Ian Pouncey | I support publishing it as a Draft; however, I suggest the changes in the comments sections below (for editors' discretion) |
First select which revision of the page these comments apply to. The revision date is after "Editors Draft:" before the heading level 1.
For each comment, remember to indicate if it is a suggestion for editor's discretion or if you feel it must be addressed before this version is published.
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results | |
| Date: 2010/11/12 17:28:49 | 4 |
| Other date, included in Review Comments field below. |
(4 responses didn't contain an answer to this question)
| Responder | Version and Comments | Reivew Comments |
|---|---|---|
| Shawn Henry | Date: 2010/11/12 17:28:49 | |
| Sharron Rush | ||
| Helle Bjarnø | ||
| Jack Welsh | ||
| Sandi Wassmer | Date: 2010/11/12 17:28:49 | As I am new to the EOWG and have not been involved in the briefing, scoping and development of the document, I think it would not be appropriate for me to make point-on-point comments. However, as the Appendices 2 and 3 that I wrote in the UK Government's eAccessibility Action Plan articulate my views on the subject, I would be more than happy to provide whatever input is deemed appropriate at this stage. The plan is located at: http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/business-sectors/docs/e/10-1194-e-accessibility-action-plan.pdf |
| Eric Eggert | Date: 2010/11/12 17:28:49 | |
| Kate Roberts | ||
| Ian Pouncey | Date: 2010/11/12 17:28:49 | # Introduction - Paragraph 2: 'and other web tools to make them accessible to people with disabilities, inclusive, and usable for everyone', 'to people with disabilities' seems unnecessary, does 'accessible, inclusive, and usable for everyone' keep the meaning? I think we've already discussed this but it still doesn't read well to me. # Understanding Usability and User-Centered Design (UCD) - Paragraph 1: Given that most readers will not have access to ISO 9241 documentation is it worth mentioning here? Is there a definitive overview we can link to if this stays? |
The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:
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