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

RE: review the 6 LC comments pending

From: 이원석 <wslee@etri.re.kr>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 03:41:47 +0900
Message-ID: <B4EAD1122C31304099A5CDEA5447210F02138DB9@email2>
To: <Chris.Poppe@UGent.be>
Cc: <tmichel@w3.org>, <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Hi. Chris.
Thanks for good comments.
After updated the ontology doc by editors, I will check your comments~ ;)

Best regards,
Wonsuk.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-
> annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Chris Poppe
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 7:04 PM
> To: tmichel@w3.org; public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Subject: RE: review the 6 LC comments pending
> 
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> My comments on the answers to the LC comments :)
> My main concern is what is the goal of these answers? Is it to state what
> has changed or what will (potentially) be changed. As you will see in my
> comments below, most of the answers are not reflected yet in the documents.
> 
> 
> Ontology
> 2389:  change "are a possible." to "are possible.".
> 2393:  Section "1.2.2 Multimedia container formats in scope" and section
> "5.2.3 Multimedia container formats mapping tables" in the ontology
> document
> are not complete (missing examples and mappings respectively).  It does
> not
> seem a good idea to me to have empty mapping tables in the document.
> 2398: ok
> 2403: I would extend the example in the ontology document, now the title
> sais: "How to use the POWDER protocol for publishing descriptions of media
> resources". Maybe it's better to say: "How to use the POWDER protocol for
> publishing descriptions of multiple media resources.".
> Also, this example depends on the RDF version of our ontology so we should
> add a descriptive introduction to the example.
> 2404: change "ontlogy" to "ontology". I find the answer confusing, will
> the
> RDF appendix be part of this ontology document or not?  BTW, the RDF-
> version
> has no identifiers for the different classes and properties!
> 2405: I guess the answer should say: "we changed this" and not "we will
> change this".
>  Also it sais: "A paragraph will be added that specifies the purpose of
> the
> specification and its scope: the property list, its RDF implementation and
> the set of mappings.". Where is this paragraph?
> The changes to the mapping table are not done.
> It sais: "and will have to correct this in the last place where the
> confusion unfortunately still figures in the document.". Where is this in
> the document?
> 2411: The example of broadcast date still has to be added.
> 2417: The answer is done, but the changes have not been done yet.
> 2418 :  The answer sais: " We agreed with your editorial comments and will
> implement them in the coming weeks."  Now I am confused about the goal of
> the answers to the LC comments (in general), is it to state what we will
> change or is it to state that we did change something according to the
> request?
> The XPATH expressions still need to be changed.
> 
> API:
> 2394: This answer has a "TODO" in it.
> 2395: The statement about exceptions has not been added yet.
> 2406: ok.
> 2410: ok.
> 2419: This answer has "TODO's" in it.
> 
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> Chris
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-media-annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Thierry
> MICHEL
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 9:03 PM
> To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
> Subject: review the 6 LC comments pending
> 
> All MAWG participants,
> 
> 
> We have currently 6 LC comments for which we have a drafted "Proposed
> Resolution" [status="pending"]
> 
> Please review these 6 comment responses and send feedback to the MAWG
> mailing if needed.
> If there are no issue raised by the next telecon meeting next tuesday on
> these responses to comments, we will consider those as *resolved by the
> MAWG* [status="resolved-yes"]
> 
> LC Comments to review:
> 
> 1-List of comments on "Ontology for Media Resource 1.0:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42786/WD-mediaont-10-
> 20100608/
> 2389:
> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42786/WD-mediaont-10-
> 20100608/
> 2393:
> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42786/WD-mediaont-10-
> 20100608/
> 2417:
> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42786/WD-mediaont-10-
> 20100608/
> 2404:
> 
> 2-List of comments on "Ontology for API Resource 1.0:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42786/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-
> 2010
> 0608/2395
> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42786/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-
> 2010
> 0608/2410?cid=2410
> 
> Best,
> 
> Thierry.
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 27 September 2010 18:42:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 September 2010 18:42:25 GMT