RE: IETF Website Redesign Effort
"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com> Thu, 08 May 2008 20:26 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EDE028C1EA; Thu, 8 May 2008 13:26:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3138828C1EA for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 May 2008 13:26:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 mQM6n7Ewutzg for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 May 2008 13:26:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from colibri.verisign.com (colibri.verisign.com [65.205.251.74]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D15D3A66B4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 May 2008 13:25:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MOU1WNEXCN02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (mailer2.verisign.com [65.205.251.35]) by colibri.verisign.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id m48KCrOM010922; Thu, 8 May 2008 13:12:53 -0700
Received: from MOU1WNEXMB09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.25.15.197]) by MOU1WNEXCN02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 8 May 2008 13:25:03 -0700
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Subject: RE: IETF Website Redesign Effort
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 13:25:16 -0700
Message-ID: <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C3166155734D8D2@mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
In-Reply-To: <941D5DCD8C42014FAF70FB7424686DCF0303D28D@eusrcmw721.eamcs.ericsson.se>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: IETF Website Redesign Effort
Thread-Index: Aciwrkxj28/2nmFPRFqBYlTB1C0AzQAU6fsAABGelzA=
From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
To: Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2008 20:25:03.0799 (UTC) FILETIME=[99046470:01C8B149]
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Actually this represents currently accepted engineering practice in the usability field. According to Nielsen you can identify 80% of issues with small scale studies of 5 people. The point here is not to create a statistically representative sample, it is to identity the chief issues that may be of concern. You should always do a pre-survey before you do the main run or else you will fail to ask the right questions. Now I do have a big problem with the practice of publishing 'scientific studies' on the basis of small sample sizes. You can get a paper published in the security usability field on the basis of three samples of 9 persons each. That is actually one of the larger studies. But that is a different matter and in any case they have rather more methodological issues to deal with than sample size. > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Eric Gray > Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 8:09 AM > To: Mark Nottingham > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > Subject: RE: IETF Website Redesign Effort > > Mark, > > Unfortunately, the way I read this, it is effectively > not the latter. The impression I am left with is that 10 > volunteers are being asked for feedback on changes. Assuming > this is an iterative process, their collective feedback could > have almost any arbitrary degree of impact on the final > result - depending on how well developed the current plan is > and how responsive the change makers expect to be to feedback. > > Hence the value of Brian's observation that there > should be some effort to determine if the general outline of > planned changes is something that most people agree to. > > Also, as has been politely hinted at already, the > sample selection method is likely to "poison" the sample. > Why the first 10 starting from a specific message at a > specific time convenient to only a narrow set of time zones? > Why only 10? Why publish the names of the > victim^H^H^H^H^Holunteers? None of these seem to be the sort > of factors one would like to see in getting a reasonable > cross section of the (probably) tens of thousands of people > who use the IETF website on a regular basis (where is that > visitor counter, or the web-site at the moment, anyway?). > > -- > Eric Gray > Principal Engineer > Ericsson > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On > > Behalf Of Mark Nottingham > > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 9:53 PM > > To: Russ Housley > > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: IETF Website Redesign Effort > > > > The message on-announce was worded as if these people would be > > *performing* the redesign, but I read your message below as saying > > that they'll serve a a pool of testers. > > > > I sincerely hope the truth is closer to the latter... > > > > > > On 08/05/2008, at 6:11 AM, Russ Housley wrote: > > > > > Stephane: > > > > > >>> We are inviting the first ten (10) interested members > of the IETF > > >>> community who respond to this email to become a part of > > the website > > >>> redesign team. If you are interested in assisting with > > this effort, > > >>> please respond to this email as soon as possible. > > >> > > >> It is no longer "rough consensus and running code", it is > > now "quick > > >> click and no SMTP latency". > > > > > > This approach was taken at my suggestion. > > > > > > These early reviewers are so that the Secretariat can get some > > > feedback about the new design without have a large number > of people > > > pile on. Think of it as a product test group. Once > these folks are > > > comfortable that the new design is an improvement, there > will be an > > > opportunity for broader comment. > > > > > > Russ > > > IETF Chair > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > IETF mailing list > > > IETF@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > > > > -- > > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > IETF mailing list > > IETF@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > _______________________________________________ > IETF mailing list > IETF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Re: IETF Website Redesign Effort Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: IETF Website Redesign Effort Russ Housley
- Re: IETF Website Redesign Effort Brian E Carpenter
- RE: IETF Website Redesign Effort Song Haibin
- RE: IETF Website Redesign Effort Song Haibin
- Re: IETF Website Redesign Effort Mark Nottingham
- RE: IETF Website Redesign Effort Eric Gray
- RE: IETF Website Redesign Effort Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- RE: IETF Website Redesign Effort Hadriel Kaplan
- Re: IETF Website Redesign Effort Sivasubramanian Muthusamy