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

AW: ACTION-340: LC comment 2417

From: Bailer, Werner <werner.bailer@joanneum.at>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 16:19:16 +0100
To: Florian Stegmaier <stegmai@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de>
CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD9846F872C7874BB4E0FDF2A61EF09F965B78914D@RZJC1EX.jr1.local>

I think updating the syntax of the type definitions in the table was still one of the open issues for the doc.

Best regards,
Von: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] im Auftrag von Florian Stegmaier [stegmai@dimis.fim.uni-passau.de]
Gesendet: Montag, 08. November 2010 14:07
An: public-media-annotation@w3.org
Betreff: ACTION-340: LC comment 2417

Hi all!

Regarding to my action points, i have checked the comment was reflected in the document. The definitions of copyright and policy look fine, but the type definition is a little bit weird to me.

{ (((statement:String), (identifier:URI)) | ((statement:String), (identifier:URI)?) | ((statement:String)?, (identifier:URI))), (type:URI)? }

Maybe i missed something, but i donīt understand the "?" should it mean optional? Anyway, the PLING group proposed to use three properties - maybe i missed also the discussion about it ;)

The rest of the comments are reflected.

Dipl. Inf. Florian Stegmaier
Chair of Distributed Information Systems
University of Passau
Innstr. 43
94032 Passau

Room 248 ITZ

Tel.: +49 851 509 3063
Fax: +49 851 509 3062

Received on Monday, 8 November 2010 15:21:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:40 UTC