W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > November 2010

Review of LC-2418

From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 13:39:55 +0100
Message-ID: <4CD7EF9B.4070504@w3.org>
To: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Per my action Item, I have done a review of LC-2418


Items NOT implemented in the spec: (Must do)
--------------------------------------------

* ed3.:
------- You have a CSS rule that sets margin-{top,bottom} to 0.3em on li 
and p. This makes your document quite hard to read, I have to go tinker 
with it in Firebug in order to go through it. Please don't change some 
of the fundamental style rules from the basic W3C style.
→ NOT Done, still there:
li, p  { margin-top: 0.3em; margin-bottom: 0.3em; }
I had asked Wonsuk to remove the CSS from the document and link to an 
external CSS page.
See:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2010Sep/0045.html


* substantial16:
----------------
  "A controlled vocabulary such as [BCP 47] SHOULD be used." What are 
the cases in which this rule has an exception?
→ NOT done
→ the spec still says « The language used in the resource. A controlled 
vocabulary such as [BCP 47] SHOULD be used ». resolution was to change 
to RECOMMEND.

* substantial17:
----------------
"it MAY also define a coordinate system that can be used to interpret 
these measurements" Is there a controlled vocabulary for these? 
Everywhere that there's something that looks like there could be one 
(e.g. whenever something has a "type" this should be indicated).
→ NOT done
→ the statement in the spec is *unchanged*.
→ the  example of a geocoordinateis is *not added*
Resolutuon was: [About ""it MAY also define a coordinate system that can 
be used to interpret these measurements" Is there a controlled 
vocabulary for these? ", we will give an example of a geocoordinate that 
can be used in this case and rephrase the sentence to avoid the 
confusion about "interpreting the measurements" in the next version of 
the document.]


I am unsure about this Item

ed19.:
-----
In general it would be helpful if you could be clearer about what the 
normative statements apply to. What is it that MUST do this or that? Is 
it an abstract usage of an ontology? A concrete implementation? 
Something else?



Items implemented in the spec: OK
---------------------------------

* ed1.:→ OK Done: removed
* ed2.: → OK Done: removed
* ed4.: → OK Done:
* ed5.: → OK Done: statement removed
* ed6.: → OK Done: statement removed
* ed.7: → OK Done: splitted
* ed8.: → OK Done:
* ed9.: → OK Done: statement removed
* substantive 11: → OK Done: HTML5 statement removed
* ed12.: → OK Done: statement removed
* ed13.: → OK Done:
* ed14.: → OK Done: statement removed
* substantial15: → OK Done: removed) replaced by MUST use this
* substantial18: → OK Done : Added
* ed.20: → OK Addressed: columns not removed, but OK as we have added N/A.
* ed.21:→ OK Done: explanation added)
* substantial 22: → Done OK- Xpath expressions harmonized
* ed.23: → (OK done- section removed)



For more details see my review attached
Received on Monday, 8 November 2010 12:40:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 8 November 2010 12:40:09 GMT