RE: SmartLink Report (Agenda Item Report)
Paulo Coimbra
In my view pushing the people to register simultaneously in two different systems is highly counter-productive. Thus if it is decided that we also keep the regonline tool, I propose it to be done in the back office without involving the ws attendees.
From: Kate Hartmann [mailto:kate.h...@owasp.org]
Sent: sexta-feira, 28 de Janeiro de 2011 14:22
To: paulo....@owasp.org; Sandra Paiva; dinis...@owasp.org
Cc: Sarah Baso; John Wilander
Subject: SmartLink Report (Agenda Item Report)
Here is a link to the Agenda Item report.
https://www.regonline.com/activereports/Smartlink.aspx?rptType=70&EventId=m7E7CZDAhLM=
If you look at this report, it will tell you how many individuals choose a particular working session. As you can see, some choices were made earlier than others as I have only finished adding the working sessions yesterday. I can easily send out an email requesting attendees update their registrations.
As the schedule is filled in with dates and times, we can print out individual schedules – or have the attendees print out their schedules – from the program. I remember this effort created hours and hours of work during the last summit.
What do you think?
Sandra Paiva
Hi Kate,
I have glanced the link with the list and there are a couple of issues that I don't understand clearly:
- Are the categories highlighted in green Working Sessions? The reason I am asking this is that I can see some that do not exist as such in the WS wiki page. Some seem to be more like Objectives inside some WS. This worries me because the wiki is the base we are all using for the WS consolidation work and having information duplicated that does not obey rigorously to the same criteria will, in my view, create a huge amount of problems.
- The numbers registered in the several sections have absolutely nothing to do with the numbers of attendees we can see on the WS wiki page. And because of the question above, I don't know how we will be able to know exactly who will attend what.
The amount of information we are dealing with is massive and when this happens there is always a lot of room for mistakes - in my opinion, the more dispersion we create, the more difficult it will be to have accurate information that can be dealt with in a quick and effective manner.
My 2 cents.
Sandra
OWASP Summit2011 Team
Kate Hartmann
Isn’t EVERY attendee a WS attendee? J
What is the advantage of using the wiki over the registration system? (I’m asking because I really don’t know) Will the wiki provide a mechanism for individual schedules?
Kate Hartmann
I copied the WS as they were listed on the wiki. Please give me an example of one that is not an actual working session.
It was my understanding that the goal was to narrow the number of working sessions to a manageable number. Therefore, as they are removed from the wiki or assigned actual schedule details, this would be passed into the system. The final outcome would be a workable, individual schedule for attendees that lists the sessions they had indicated an interest in.
John W. had asked for a “point and click” working session registration process to accommodate those attendees who did not have a wiki user name or were not comfortable using the wiki. He stated that to enter one’s name into multiple sessions individually was a tedious and time consuming process.
The request was for an easier process for attendees…that’s what I have provided.
Since I am not managing the working session content or schedule, I have no particular preference on how it is done. I was asked to provide an option, and I have done that.
Kate Hartmann
I don’t think I addressed your concern regarding the apparent incompleteness of the data.
I have not asked people to modify their preferences nor have those who have registered through Diplomata been asked to fill in the information.
This is a tool and is as good as the information loaded into it…just like the wiki
From: Sandra Paiva [mailto:sandra...@owasp.org]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 9:43 AM
Kate Hartmann
Idea…instead of having a list of names to the right of the WS, could we have a link to the report? It’s a “smartlink” so it generates a fresh report each time it’s clicked.
From: Sandra Paiva [mailto:sandra...@owasp.org]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 9:43 AM
Sandra Paiva
Hi Kate, see inline, please.
De: Kate Hartmann [mailto:kate.h...@owasp.org]
Enviada: sexta-feira, 28 de Janeiro de 2011 15:05
Para: 'Sandra Paiva'; 'Paulo Coimbra'; dinis...@owasp.org
Cc: 'Sarah Baso'; 'John Wilander'; owasp-su...@lists.owasp.org; summit-2011-wo...@owasp.org
Assunto: RE: SmartLink Report (Agenda Item Report)
I copied the WS as they were listed on the wiki. Please give me an example of one that is not an actual working session.
Assigning Business Risk t (23) - not a WS
Toos Interoperability (Da (1) and Tools Interoperability (D (14) - the latter is a WS but the name comes up twice in the list with different numbers of attendees.
Metrics for Positive secu (15) - not a WS
Consumer friendly labelin (10) - not a WS
Translating technical ris (11) - not a WS
Browser Security Working (21) - not a WS
Java Script (12) - not a WS
(There are more…)
It was my understanding that the goal was to narrow the number of working sessions to a manageable number. Therefore, as they are removed from the wiki or assigned actual schedule details, this would be passed into the system. The final outcome would be a workable, individual schedule for attendees that lists the sessions they had indicated an interest in.
As far as I see it, we will only be able to narrow down the number of WS once we have the content finalized and a clear notion of how many working sessions have enough information to stand, how many overlap in terms of objectives, etc. That process is still in course and only after its finished, I think, it will be possible to start working on the schedule.
John W. had asked for a “point and click” working session registration process to accommodate those attendees who did not have a wiki user name or were not comfortable using the wiki. He stated that to enter one’s name into multiple sessions individually was a tedious and time consuming process.
The request was for an easier process for attendees…that’s what I have provided.
Since I am not managing the working session content or schedule, I have no particular preference on how it is done. I was asked to provide an option, and I have done that.
Yes, of course, I understand that. I would only alert for the fact that any option to be considered should take into account the work being prepared and done both on the WS content and on the schedule. :-)
Paulo Coimbra
The wiki username page shows this http://www.owasp.org/index.php/User:Keith_Turpin kind of info. This is necessary to inform about who is who in the Summit. It will also be useful to generate an adequate historical picture of the event.