Cert Service Webinar Evaluation

[Christopher Bongaarts <>]

I like this version.  I made a couple of comments but I think it's ready to ship.

On 6/7/2016 8:29 AM, Paul Caskey wrote:

Thanks for the feedback.

 

I’ve incorporated this type of chart into the report (page 5).

 

If you could all please take one last look and then, I think we are ready to send it out for public comment.

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NZYScUHCzT-miDRJQIa9P2K1tYKBfn9Lr2yLzV4vIF4/edit?pref=2&pli=1#

 

 

 

Thanks all!

 

 

From: E. Todd Atkins []
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 5:42 PM
To: Paul Caskey
Subject: Re: [CertSvc Review] report draft - one remaining issue

 

This version looks clear enough for me to visualize the comparison without clutter of multiple lines or charts.

 

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Paul Caskey <> wrote:

Something like this?

 

 

From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Paul Caskey
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 1:23 PM
To: Christopher Bongaarts <>;
Subject: RE: [CertSvc Review] report draft - one remaining issue

 

Hmm, that might be good.  So, one column per ‘potential enhancement’, with different colors for the priorities (low/medium/high)…

 

What do the rest of you think about that idea?

 

 

 

 

 

From: [] On Behalf Of Christopher Bongaarts
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 12:48 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [CertSvc Review] report draft - one remaining issue

 

Maybe a good case for doing it as a single combined graph using clustered or stacked columns.

 

On 6/3/2016 11:29 AM, Paul Caskey wrote:

Yeah, I can’t seem to develop much of a preference myself.

 

Let’s see what the rest of the group thinks…

 

And thanks, Todd for your email as well!

 

 

 

From: Frazier, William S [ITSYS] []
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 11:24 AM
To: Paul Caskey ;
Subject: Re: [CertSvc Review] report draft - one remaining issue

 

Unfortunately, while I agree that the original graph was difficult to assimilate, I find the three separate ones very hard to correlate.  I really don’t have a clue as how to best deal with it.  I do think that if we go with the separate ones, the titles need to be more explanatory.

 

Bill

 

----------------------------------------------

William Frazier

Iowa State University

 

 

From: <> on behalf of Paul Caskey <>
Date: Friday, June 3, 2016 at 10:37 AM
To: "" <>
Subject: [CertSvc Review] report draft - one remaining issue

 

Hi Everyone-

 

Thanks for the comments and suggestions on the draft report for our group.

 

There’s one remaining issue before we can send it out for public comment: there’s a graph that can be a bit confusing.

 

Please take a look at the only remaining comment in the doc (bottom of page 5): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NZYScUHCzT-miDRJQIa9P2K1tYKBfn9Lr2yLzV4vIF4/edit

 

The graphs below were suggested as a possible alternative.  What do you all think?  Which is better?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- 

%%  Christopher A. Bongaarts   %%            %%

%%  OIT - Identity Management  %%  http://umn.edu/~cab  %%

%%  University of Minnesota    %%  +1 (612) 625-1809    %%

 

--

E. Todd Atkins

Enterprise Technology Services

University of California, Santa Barbara

https://www.ets.ucsb.edu

-- 
%%  Christopher A. Bongaarts   %%            %%
%%  OIT - Identity Management  %%  http://umn.edu/~cab  %%
%%  University of Minnesota    %%  +1 (612) 625-1809    %%