Re: [ietf-outcomes] Adoption legend summary on each page?

"David Harrington" <ietfdbh@comcast.net> Sun, 14 February 2010 06:40 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
X-Original-To: ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 335F33A794F for <ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:40:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eLj5-xPmLOnl for <ietf-outcomes@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:40:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DD403A7A3D for <ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:40:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omta13.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.52]) by qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id hihH1d00317dt5G5AiiHGR; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 06:42:17 +0000
Received: from Harrington73653 ([24.147.240.98]) by omta13.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id hiiH1d002284sdk3ZiiHK4; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 06:42:17 +0000
From: "David Harrington" <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
To: <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, <ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>
References: <4B76DEB8.5040001@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 01:42:16 -0500
Message-ID: <0ac201caad40$d9289c70$0600a8c0@china.huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <4B76DEB8.5040001@dcrocker.net>
Thread-Index: Acqs0H8oWWBjhdwWRUytbO4P4Kme3AAbNZUQ
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
Subject: Re: [ietf-outcomes] Adoption legend summary on each page?
X-BeenThere: ietf-outcomes@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Outcomes Wiki discussion list <ietf-outcomes.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-outcomes>, <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-outcomes>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-outcomes@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-outcomes>, <mailto:ietf-outcomes-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 06:40:56 -0000

Hi Dave,

I found --, -, 0, +, and ++ fairly intuitive because obviously ++ is
more than +. (the 0 obviously needs explanation)
I do not find essential, useful, pending, minor, and failure to be as
intuitive.

I also find the ordering to be unusual. 
I tend to think of numbers, as in graphs, growing larger to the right.
So I would think the ordering should be --, -, 0, +, ++
or failure, minor, pending, useful, essential

>From my perspective, I think snmpv1 has been massively implemented,
deployed and used.
However, many environments deliberately disable snmp for security
reasons.
essential means "Basic or indispensable; necessary"
I don't know that a protocol that can be disabled in many environments
should be called "essential".
maybe important would be better than essential.

I find it difficult to rate things using different scales mixed
together. Is essential (i.e. necessary) the opposite of failure (not
achieving the desired end or ends)? Is useful the opposite of minor? I
think that you should compare apples with apples; the notations
equivakent to '-' and '+' should be opposites, so if you are going to
use "minor" (presumbaly meaning minor usage), then you should also use
major, as in major usage. Or you should use "very useful", "useful",
"not useful" and "not used" (or something else that uses relative
levels of the same metric). 

dbh


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-outcomes-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:ietf-outcomes-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
> Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 12:18 PM
> To: ietf-outcomes@ietf.org
> Subject: [ietf-outcomes] Adoption legend summary on each page?
> 
> Folks,
> 
> g'day
> 
> Ray Pelletier commented to me that the notation for the 
> Adoption column is not 
> necessarily intuitive, and that it might be helpful to 
> replicate the coding 
> rules on each page.
> 
> It might be helpful to repeat the gist of the coding 
> description on each page.
> 
> I've put in a version of this onto the Application page, 
> associated with the 
> Legend pointer:
> 
>     <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/misc/outcomes/wiki/IetfApplications>
> 
> and would like some feedback, before installing it on the 
> other pages, or 
> removing it.
> 
> Are you comfortable with the form of summary I put on the page?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> d/
> -- 
> 
>    Dave Crocker
>    Brandenburg InternetWorking
>    bbiw.net
> _______________________________________________
> ietf-outcomes mailing list
> ietf-outcomes@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-outcomes
>