W3C

Results of Questionnaire User Needs Review

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody.

This questionnaire was open from 2021-06-04 to 2021-07-07.

18 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. How we define 'User Need': User Need Statements
  2. List of user needs
  3. Intersectional needs
  4. List of contexts

1. How we define 'User Need': User Need Statements

By calling this a ‘statement’ we aim to answer the question of what a user need is as well as propose an editorial format. For example, at a high level, “What is a user need and how do you write one?”. The user need is defined as:

A description of what a user requires in context, to achieve a goal or complete a task.

This positions the concept of user needs in relation to both functional needs and any necessary accessibility guidance.

Is this statement format useful? If not, please outline your reasoning and any comments about improvements.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
yes 12
no 5

(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder How we define 'User Need': User Need StatementsComments
Jeanne F Spellman yes "in context" is not as clear as it could be. I would propose new language, but I'm not sure what you wanted to accomplish by including those words. I think it reads well without it "A description of what a user requires to achieve a goal or complete a task.".

After reading question 5, I have a better understanding of what you mean, so I would make it a statement followed by a list. For example:
A description of what a user requires in context, to achieve a goal or complete a task. Examples of content include:
* environment or situation of use (user environment context)
* browsing environment (AT and browser/platform context)
* content type (content context)
* task being undertaken (task context)
* user goal (goal context)
Tobias Christian Jensen yes
Suzanne Taylor
Todd Libby yes
Wilco Fiers no "a user" is far too broad. This clearly isn't intending to describe the needs of every individual user. This is looking at groups of users, which I think should be part of the definition. Additionally, I'm not too sure it makes sense to assume everything someone may want to do is to achieve a goal or complete a task. If I spend my evening clicking from page to page on wikipedia, I don't do it with a specific goal or task in mind. If goals / tasks can be as generic as "find something interesting", then it doesn't seem like it's worth including in the definition.
Jake Abma no User Need:

"A description of a specific user requirement originated out of functional needs"

"A description of a specific user requirement originated out of (based on) (ones) functional need(s)"

1. Like to see the relation to the Functional Needs, as this keeps it clear and clean...
2. in context not needed as other context results in other functional needs
3. "to achieve a goal or complete a task" can be deleted, as without it this is always also applicable)
Fredrik Fischer yes
Charles LaPierre yes
Lisa Seeman-Horwitz yes I think it needs some tweeking but is close
Albert Kim no I don't know if it's really the best to put the "in context" part in there. How about starting from here and thinking of specifying a little more clearly without making the format too confusing: "A description of what a user requires to perform a task"
Rain Breaw Michaels yes The following response comes from a working session with JohnK and Rain: 

1. Yes, we think that this format is useful. We agree with Lisa's comment that it may need more tweaking, as we find the language a bit confusing. But this is a good starting point.

2. We want to acknowledge our COGA TF colleague Albert's concern about the words "in context," but after discussion both John K and I feel that the words "in context" are actually quite important. Removing them might imply that things like separate help documentation are sufficient supports, which would not be acceptable. 

3. We found Albert's choice of the word "perform" in place of "complete" to be compelling and worth consideration. This would change the statement to "A description of what a user requires in context, to achieve a goal or perform a task." This gives room for more descriptive support that focuses on an overall experience and not just the end result.

We acknowledge, however, that the word "complete" may be necessary because of the legal precedence regarding task completion. For this reason, we are simply using this response to document our thoughts on the word perform rather than making the actual change. There may be opportunity to foster more understanding around the overall experience elsewhere.
Becky Gibson yes
Jennifer Strickland yes
Mary Jo Mueller no IMO it is too brief/abstract to really understand what goes into describing a user need.

From The Nielsen Norman Group article on User Needs Statements: The 'Define' Stage in Design Thinking. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/user-need-statements/

- Definition: A user need statement is an actionable problem statement used to summarize who a particular user is, the user’s need, and why the need is important to that user. It defines what you want to solve before you move on to generating potential solutions, in order to 1) condense your perspective on the problem, and 2) provide a metric for success to be used throughout the design thinking process.

The article goes on to explain that user need statements encourage us to see users’ needs as verbs (that is, goals and end states) instead of nouns that describe solutions.
Jason White no I prefer the format used in ISO/IEC 29138-1:2018, in which each need has a title, description, instances of application, and examples - all properly written out in a way that should be clearer to the reader than the terse draft language of your document. The W3C document reads more like a set of notes than a draft. I think a document in a format such as that of the ISO would be clearer to potential audiences (e.g., specification developers, implementers of W3C/WAI accessibility guidance) than what you currently have. I also think coordination between the W3C and the ISO in this area would be desirable, if it is possible, for purposes of standards harmonization and to avoid duplication of work. Even if a "living document" is proposed, it should be properly drafted and of high quality, given the foundational importance of user needs to all accessibility-related standards and guidance.

If the W3C effort has a different focus than that of the ISO, this should be clarified and the relationship between the respective documents addressed. My concern is that there will be a lack of harmonization and considerable overlap of content between the two.
Aimee Ubbink yes
Lionel Wolberger yes
Mike Beganyi yes Without being too pedant, I'm not sure that the comma is required in that statement.

2. List of user needs

Please review the current draft list of user needs, are there a) any missing needs, or b) any needs that are redundant, inaccurate, or unnecessary?

[Perceivable]

  • Users can perceive:
  • Content
  • Controls (or objects role, system state and other properties)
  • Semantic structure
  • Users can perceive (changes to):
  • Controls (objects role, system state and other properties)
  • Content (SPA, tablist, AJAX / Async)

[Operable]

  • Users can operate controls:
  • Without Duration requirement
  • Adjust Duration requirement
  • Without Physical movements
  • Users can navigate content
  • Users can control their:
  • Content orientation
  • Orientation in a space

[Understandable]

  • Users can understand:
  • Content
  • Structure
  • Navigation
  • Controls (or objects role, system state and other properties)
  • Changed content
  • Users can find help information about how to use the content
  • Users can identify their position:
  • In content
  • In context
  • In a process
  • In a space
  • Users can orientate themselves in:
  • Immersive or augmented environments
  • Instructions for accessible interaction
  • Understanding available interactions

[Personalization]

  • Users can customize (or request):
  • Content
  • Context
  • Users get customized (via platform):
  • Content
  • Context
  • Functionality
  • Users can find help information about:
  • how to use the content
  • Users can control:
  • time-sensitive Content
  • time-sensitive Tasks
  • time-based media (including dynamic values, EQ, volume)
  • Users personalization preferences:
  • are honoured by content authors
  • are not compromised by security
  • do not compromise privacy
  • Users can, device independently:
  • Interact
  • Input data
  • Route and control output

[Discoverability]

  • Users can discover new content
  • Users can recover from errors
  • Users can avoid errors

[Distractions and Inflictions]

  • Users can: (not interrupted)
  • Focus attention
  • Direct attention
  • Shift attention
  • Users are not harmed:
  • Physically (to self or others within a physical environment)
  • Neurologically
  • Users can avoid personal risk
  • Users privacy should be preserved
  • Users are aware of alerts

Details

Responder List of user needs
Jeanne F Spellman Perceivable: Users need to associate text with the speaker. Perhaps it is a subset of Semantic Structure, but I think it merits its own.
Operable: "Without Physical movement" is too bleeding edge, IMO. There is some movement required in everything except the new brain controls. Switch, eyeblink, and other assistive tech all have some physical movement. I think this would be better if it were "With assistive technology" which is inclusive of brain controls. Assistive tech will be with us for a long time to come.
Understandable: Nit: In the US "Users can orientate themselves in" should be "Users can orient themselves in" I checked W3C official dictionary (Merriam Webster).
Distractions: Users privacy is the only "should". It stands out. I think it should be fixed. "Users privacy is preserved comparable to all users" ?
??: Where are speech input for navigation and aphasia for speech-controlled devices?
All: It's hard to think what isn't there. For Understandable, has their been a comparison with "Content Usable"?
Tobias Christian Jensen Operable:
"Without Physical movements": I suppose some form of physical movement will be required.

Discoverability:
"Users can discover new content": Is new content the same as new contexts? It could be read as "content that is fresh, just published", and thus something other than new contexts (which should also be clear).
Suzanne Taylor Users are not *purposely* mislead, stressed, or shocked
- no experiences (especially immersive) promoted as any genre less intense than the actual experience
- no surreal experiences that do not have warnings (e.g. simulations / diagnostics that give people the impression that something is happening or has happened that would cause trauma if it did happen)
- no intentionally misleading information that is designed to cause psychological stress (e.g. News headlines imply something worse than is actually reported, especially when news is automatically delivered, rather than sought.)
- no intentionally misleading designs (e.g. the most prominent button toward the end of a form where submit buttons are generally placed is for a completely different service/action)
- no purposefully leaving out information that could be easily provided with the intention of creating stress or fear that is disproportionate to the information and monetization scheme (e.g. a major news organization requires attention to their media at a particular time to find out which very dangerous toy was recalled)

Todd Libby Operable, Users can operate controls: "Without physical movements" - I would guess there would be some kind of physical movement of some sort. Too broad of a statement in my opinion.
Wilco Fiers
Jake Abma
Fredrik Fischer This all works for me. Perception of changes in structure would be nice, since apps may change thesemantic structure of their output due to controls or other user-independent factors.
Charles LaPierre Operable I would think we would have "multiple ways" listed (voice, keyboard, mouse, eye, puff, etc.)
Lisa Seeman-Horwitz this should be tested against the coga user needs to see what is missing.
A quick view does have missing items, such as
- restoring context when it is lost
- support for tasks
-understand risks
etc
also use is not well defined
Albert Kim
Rain Breaw Michaels This comments is coming from both John K and Rain, during a supplemental COGA TF working review. We created a new document with this list and highlighted our recommendations in PINK:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/123xE_fZKPXXZULNsECSAC8uukGnSdbduGtrGi5jVSTc/edit?usp=sharing

Our recommendations include the ones brought up in Lisa's comment, as well.
Becky Gibson What is meant by objects role - should it be object's role (possessive form)? Until I made that connection it was confusing to me.
Operate without Physical movements seems a bit restrictive It seems that some movement is always necessary be it speech, eye movement,etc. Thus, I think this needs to be better worded.
Users can avoid personal risk is also a bit generic? What type of risks - I am guessing this is referring to physical since privacy/security is covered.
I would expand Users are aware of alerts to alerts and notifications or just Users are aware of notifications since alerts are a form of notification.
Jennifer Strickland The combination of potential workarounds for intersectional folk, the layering of those workarounds may be another item to consider.
Mary Jo Mueller I have a question (though I don't have a full copy of the ISO standard) about how well this list of user needs jives with the existing ISO 30071-1:2019. This is It seems by looking at the outline, that there are a few potential additional areas to explore:

- Needs related to conformity with user expectations: I think "predictability" could fall into this category, like the WCAG requirement category that falls under "Understandable"
- Needs related to error tolerance
- Needs related to equitable use

There could be other sub-categories in the details of that standard if someone on the team has a copy of the ISO standard.

I don't see "without a pointing device" or something covering "keyboard operable" under the operable section or something to the user need that the user can provide input or interact with content in a modality that works for them.
Jason White These proposed "needs" are more like software/content requirements than actual user needs. It is clear that there are numerous accessibility needs documented in ISO/IEC 29138-1:2018 that are not included here, and, to the extent that there is overlap, the ISO document is clearer in specifying what is ultimately needed by the user (by contrast with what the system should provide or how the need should be met by information and communication technology-based systems).

I don't think the ISO document is perfect; but it covers the territory of defining users' accessibility needs more thoroughly than any other document which I have read. One could argue that some of the needs specified by the ISO aren't relevant in the Web context, but that is a judgment which ought to be made carefully - on a need-by-need basis, and it doesn't explain what is missing from the above list.
Aimee Ubbink [Understandable] Users can orientate themselves in: -> typo 'orientate' should be 'orient'
[Personalization] time-based media -> time-based Media (cap the Media to maintain consistent formatting of the previous items)
Lionel Wolberger Re: Users can operate controls... Without Physical movements. This sounds out of scope: in the end there is some movement and an associated electronic signal. I would leave it out.

Re: Users can, device independently. How does "device independently" help here? Confuses me: any ability of users is both dependent and independent of devices.

Re: Users are not harmed. Highly inconsistent with the rest of the document. Users can assess potential harm (more in keeping with the approach).

Re: Users privacy should be preserved. Privacy is so context dependent, that I would rephrase it, users privacy meets users expectations

Users can orientate themselves in: <-- This seems redundant. It repeats the above orienteering while using other words. Why stop here? Can orient themselves within a timeline. Can orient themselves semantically within an argument. No end to it. Alternatively, differentiate "orienteering" from identifying position.

Error states are so important, not sure they are best served by lumping them under Discoverability. Discovering new content is very different from being informed that you have made an error.
Mike Beganyi Fantastic summary. No comments.

3. Intersectional needs

We define intersectional needs as:

A statement that describes user needs that result from an individual having more than one functional need simultaneously in a given context.

For example, people who are both deaf and blind have different needs from people who are just deaf or just blind. Another example is where user needs may change depending on context - this may be prominent in immersive environments. We call these "intersectional needs". What intersectional needs can you identify?

Details

Responder Intersectional needs
Jeanne F Spellman It's important to split the 3 categories of deaf blind, Deaf blind, and blind deaf. They have different needs. (originally deaf losing sight later in life or deaf blind from birth; Deaf (sign language) and later blind; and blind and acquiring deafness later in life) Sheri Byrne-Haber & Janina Sajka have spoken about this and can give more detail than I know.
All the sensory and physical disabilities can also have cognitive disabilities.
Sensory can also include physical - especially with aging population.
Tobias Christian Jensen
Suzanne Taylor
Todd Libby
Wilco Fiers
Jake Abma I think we might provide insight in intersectional needs by explaining what is meant.

I do not think we should try to identify those as we do with Functional and User Needs as it might become way too complex and messy as so many people often have more than 1 Functional need and combinations might end up in a huge amount of combinations.

We might see / check if all user needs needs are covered already by a single Functional need (and vice versa) resulting in the User Need(s) but might not always be applicable...

For example: a deaf - blind person uses / needs braille, and this might also already be a user need for some blind users, covering the need already but used by more than 1 functional need.
The necessity might differ, but the user need is there already.
Fredrik Fischer That is a huge question, especially if you take cognitive accessibility into account. I could hardly list them all. But, well, being able to focus at the same time as having an overview of content (blind and cognitively disabled) for instance.
Charles LaPierre
Lisa Seeman-Horwitz Huge topic. Ufortunatly I am traveling tomorow and just found out about this survey. Huge topic
Albert Kim Wording is too confusing again for people with cognitive and learning disabilities perspective. I would highly recommend refraining from describing multiple things in one sentence "that describes user needs" is used to describe "a statement" and "that result from an individual..."is used to describe "user needs" before it. The problem with this sentence structure is that in order to understand the whole statement, one would have to be able to remember the previous description of the word while reading another description of another word, which is quite difficult for people with some cognitive and learning disabilities. Try refraining from having descriptions of multiple things all in one sentence because it will confuse people from understanding what the sentence is trying to say and will put a lot of strain on the brain in order to understand what it is meant to say.


Rain Breaw Michaels Response from a combined COGA TF working review (John K and Rain):

Cognitive disabilities may also impact hand-eye coordination or other mobility related functions. There can be a common intersection between needs for cognitive and motor supports.

Aging populations may also be disproportionately impacted by both vision and hearing changes, as well as changes to short-term memory and executive functions.

Visual processing is also worth considering. While this is technically not always "low vision," individuals with cognitive disabilities might have challenges processing visual information in a way that is comparable to limited vision. They can also experience limited field of vision due to neurological patterns.

We would also suggest adding consideration for individuals who's neurological or cognitive differences impact speaking speed, clarity, and auditory processing.
Becky Gibson motor and speech impairments - can't use speech and may not be able to use mouse or keyboard or may rely on single switch

low vision and motor impairments - may rely on magnification and speech input

Jennifer Strickland In addition to disability intersections, there are others, such as gender, socio-economics, race, age, etc.

There are often discussions of is it possible to use a workaround. When someone with an intersectional identity spends a day code switching and layering workaround upon workaround, the impact is pretty devastating. The existence of a possible workaround for a scenario should not be a valid "out."
Mary Jo Mueller The above mentioned ISO 30071-1:2019 may help identify intersectional needs.
Jason White Intersectional needs are important. They are sometimes unduly overlooked.
Aimee Ubbink
Lionel Wolberger People often have a need (or set of needs) along with the need to deny those needs. PTSD often falls into this category: a need to avoid certain triggering stimuli, along with a need to deny having this need. This intersectional need drives requirements for good default settings that require no specific user action.

Some vulnerable populations take no action, deliberately, as they wish to avoid revealing who they are--this conforms with the above need for a good default state.
Mike Beganyi I think comorbidity exists in the interactive world as it does in other spaces. The interaction of mental health and cognitive disabilities and the effects that one can have on the other are severe and prolonged. I don't foresee any unique experiences in such intersectionality.

4. List of contexts

There is a broad question around intersectional needs and context of use. The Functional Needs sub group thinks that context can determine particular user needs. We also have to define what we mean by context. Context may be environmental, due to the users situation - or technical aspects such as browser AT configuration. Context may also relate to content traits.

The following are a list of potential contexts that may determine particular user needs and how they relate to functional needs/outcomes. This will be useful for weighing and measuring when certain functional outcomes compound, or can be removed from consideration. This approach may help facilitate granular conformance measurement.

Some potential contexts could be:

  • environment or situation of use (user environment context)
  • ,
  • browsing environment (AT and browser/platform context)
  • content type (content context)
  • task being undertaken (task context)
  • user goal (goal context)

Do you have any extra contexts that we should consider?

Details

Responder List of contexts
Jeanne F Spellman not yet. It looks comprehensive but I have not thought deeply about this.
Tobias Christian Jensen I wonder if the user's mental state (e.g. being stressed or low on energy) is also covered by some of these proposed contexts.
Suzanne Taylor
Todd Libby Thinking of persons with mental health issues (e.g.: stress, anxiety, diagnosed issues) and if those are addressed on this survey.
Wilco Fiers
Jake Abma
Fredrik Fischer A person's physical or mental state may be considered a context by this definition, so, well, that.
Charles LaPierre combination of task vs. goal potentially (# of steps involved) sub goals or tasks need to be accomplished and knowing where you are in the process potentially time required to complete this task vs. tasks left.
Just an idea.
Thanks!
Lisa Seeman-Horwitz much missing such as
stress, and mentle health
. needs a sub group

Albert Kim
Rain Breaw Michaels Not at this time, but will continue to think about this one. Some that come to mind that are likely out of scope, or could perhaps be considered in the above:

- Access to internet due to geo-location
- Socioeconomic context
- Legal contexts (e.g., what are the laws for what can be made available to the user through public funding or in certain situations such as educational setting)
Becky Gibson
Jennifer Strickland The number or severity of various contexts may multiply impact. It can be difficult to determine which weigh more than others, since individual context is so unique.
Mary Jo Mueller Does environment or situation of use include hardware technology context? as in say screen size, viewport size, etc? Or is that more about location (e.g. noisy environment, bright light, dark space, geography, etc.)?
Jason White I think the needs should be specified in terms of what the over-all context (hardware, software, environment) should provide to the user, and that the task of specifying how to meet them belongs to the system-level requirements designed to meet the user needs in specific situations or under specific constraints. For example, the need for textual alternatives to audio content is generic. It can arise for situational reasons or due to a hearing-related disability. How it is met differs depending on context (e.g., real-time or prerecorded media, whether or not an immersive environment is involved). This is why there are special considerations for different contexts in which captions are used.
Aimee Ubbink
Lionel Wolberger User agency context (user is an individual acting alone vs user has a care taker or assistant assisting them)
Mike Beganyi None additional.

More details on responses

  • Jeanne F Spellman: last responded on 6, June 2021 at 15:29 (UTC)
  • Tobias Christian Jensen: last responded on 7, June 2021 at 09:09 (UTC)
  • Suzanne Taylor: last responded on 8, June 2021 at 07:36 (UTC)
  • Todd Libby: last responded on 8, June 2021 at 08:54 (UTC)
  • Wilco Fiers: last responded on 14, June 2021 at 11:26 (UTC)
  • Jake Abma: last responded on 21, June 2021 at 10:02 (UTC)
  • Fredrik Fischer: last responded on 21, June 2021 at 14:52 (UTC)
  • Charles LaPierre: last responded on 21, June 2021 at 15:11 (UTC)
  • Lisa Seeman-Horwitz: last responded on 21, June 2021 at 15:57 (UTC)
  • Albert Kim: last responded on 28, June 2021 at 11:43 (UTC)
  • Rain Breaw Michaels: last responded on 28, June 2021 at 16:00 (UTC)
  • Becky Gibson: last responded on 28, June 2021 at 20:19 (UTC)
  • Jennifer Strickland: last responded on 29, June 2021 at 13:30 (UTC)
  • Mary Jo Mueller: last responded on 29, June 2021 at 22:13 (UTC)
  • Jason White: last responded on 30, June 2021 at 15:17 (UTC)
  • Aimee Ubbink: last responded on 5, July 2021 at 17:54 (UTC)
  • Lionel Wolberger: last responded on 7, July 2021 at 15:55 (UTC)
  • Mike Beganyi: last responded on 7, July 2021 at 17:21 (UTC)

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. Gregg Vanderheiden
  2. Chris Wilson
  3. Chaals Nevile
  4. Janina Sajka
  5. Shawn Lawton Henry
  6. Katie Haritos-Shea
  7. Shadi Abou-Zahra
  8. Chus Garcia
  9. Steve Faulkner
  10. Patrick Lauke
  11. David MacDonald
  12. Gez Lemon
  13. Makoto Ueki
  14. Peter Korn
  15. Preety Kumar
  16. Bruce Bailey
  17. Georgios Grigoriadis
  18. Stefan Schnabel
  19. Romain Deltour
  20. Laura Carlson
  21. Chris Blouch
  22. Jedi Lin
  23. Kimberly Patch
  24. Glenda Sims
  25. Ian Pouncey
  26. Alastair Campbell
  27. Léonie Watson
  28. David Sloan
  29. John Kirkwood
  30. Detlev Fischer
  31. Reinaldo Ferraz
  32. Matt Garrish
  33. Mike Gifford
  34. Loïc Martínez Normand
  35. Mike Pluke
  36. Justine Pascalides
  37. Chris Loiselle
  38. Tzviya Siegman
  39. Jan McSorley
  40. Sailesh Panchang
  41. Cristina Mussinelli
  42. Jonathan Avila
  43. John Rochford
  44. Sarah Horton
  45. Sujasree Kurapati
  46. Jatin Vaishnav
  47. Sam Ogami
  48. Kevin White
  49. Paul Bohman
  50. JaEun Jemma Ku
  51. 骅 杨
  52. Victoria Clark
  53. Avneesh Singh
  54. Mitchell Evan
  55. Michael Gower
  56. biao liu
  57. Scott McCormack
  58. Denis Boudreau
  59. Rachael Bradley Montgomery
  60. Shawn Lauriat
  61. Francis Storr
  62. Rick Johnson
  63. David Swallow
  64. Aparna Pasi
  65. Gregorio Pellegrino
  66. Melanie Philipp
  67. Nicole Windmann
  68. Oliver Keim
  69. Gundula Niemann
  70. Ruoxi Ran
  71. Richard Boardman
  72. Wendy Reid
  73. Scott O'Hara
  74. Charles Adams
  75. Muhammad Saleem
  76. Amani Ali
  77. Trevor Bostic
  78. Shinya Takami
  79. Karen Herr
  80. Kathy Eng
  81. Cybele Sack
  82. Jennifer Delisi
  83. Arthur Soroken
  84. Daniel Bjorge
  85. Kai Recke
  86. David Fazio
  87. Daniel Montalvo
  88. Mario Chacón-Rivas
  89. Michael Gilbert
  90. Caryn Pagel
  91. Achraf Othman
  92. Fernanda Bonnin
  93. Jared Batterman
  94. Raja Kushalnagar
  95. Jan Williams
  96. Isabel Holdsworth
  97. Julia Chen
  98. Marcos Franco Murillo
  99. Yutaka Suzuki
  100. Azlan Cuttilan
  101. Joe Humbert
  102. Aditya Bajaj
  103. Ben Tillyer
  104. Charu Pandhi
  105. Poornima Badhan Subramanian
  106. Roberto Scano
  107. Kun Zhang
  108. Jaunita George
  109. Regina Sanchez
  110. Shawn Thompson
  111. Thomas Brunet
  112. Kenny Dunsin
  113. Jen Goulden
  114. Ronny Hendriks
  115. Breixo Pastoriza Barcia
  116. Olivia Hogan-Stark
  117. Rashmi Katakwar
  118. Julie Rawe
  119. Duff Johnson
  120. Laura Miller
  121. Will Creedle
  122. Shikha Nikhil Dwivedi
  123. Marie Csanady
  124. Meenakshi Das
  125. Perrin Anto
  126. Stephanie Louraine
  127. Jan Jaap de Groot
  128. Rebecca Monteleone
  129. Mark Applin
  130. Ian Kersey
  131. Peter Bossley
  132. Anastasia Lanz
  133. Michael Keane
  134. Chiara De Martin
  135. Giacomo Petri
  136. Andrew Barakat
  137. Devanshu Chandra
  138. Helen Zhou
  139. Jonathan Bell
  140. Bryan Trogdon
  141. Mary Ann (MJ) Jawili
  142. 禹佳 陶
  143. 锦澄 王
  144. Stephen James
  145. Jay Mullen
  146. Thorsten Katzmann
  147. Tony Holland
  148. Kent Boucher
  149. Abbey Davis
  150. Phil Day
  151. Julia Kim
  152. Michelle Lana
  153. David Williams
  154. Mikayla Thompson
  155. Catherine Droege
  156. James Edwards
  157. Eric Hind
  158. Quintin Balsdon
  159. Mario Batušić
  160. David Cox
  161. Sazzad Mahamud
  162. Kimberly Sarabia
  163. Corey Hinshaw
  164. Ashley Firth
  165. Daniel Harper-Wain
  166. Kiara Stewart
  167. Suji Sreerama
  168. Lori Oakley
  169. David Middleton
  170. Alyssa Priddy
  171. Young Choi
  172. Nichole Bui
  173. Julie Romanowski
  174. Eloisa Guerrero
  175. Daniel Henderson-Ede
  176. George Kuan
  177. YAPING LIN
  178. Justin Wilson
  179. Tiffany Burtin
  180. Shane Dittmar
  181. Niamh Kelly
  182. Matt Argomaniz Matthew Argomaniz
  183. Frankie Wolf
  184. Kimberly McGee
  185. Carolina Crespo
  186. humor927 humor927
  187. Alex Malhao
  188. Samantha McDaniel
  189. Matthäus Rojek
  190. Phong Tony Le
  191. Mathilde Buenerd
  192. Bram Janssens
  193. Graham Ritchie
  194. Jeroen Hulscher
  195. Alina Vayntrub
  196. Marco Sabidussi
  197. John Toles
  198. Jeanne Erickson Cooley
  199. Theo Hale
  200. Gert-Jan Vercauteren
  201. Karla Rubiano
  202. Aashutosh K
  203. Hidde de Vries
  204. Roland Buss

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