W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > April 2009

Re: Review of section 8

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:32:56 +1000
Message-ID: <2c0e02830904140732v34f21582ne02ad0fcd7ffaee9@mail.gmail.com>
To: RaphaŽl Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>
Cc: Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>, Davy Van Deursen <davy.vandeursen@ugent.be>, Erik Mannens <erik.mannens@ugent.be>
Hi again, :-)

I knew that giving lots of input would require lots of discussions. :-)
Well, here goes. :)


2009/4/14 RaphaŽl Troncy <Raphael.Troncy@cwi.nl>:
>> Section 8.1
>>
>> * (minor text change:) first paragraph: replace "There exists already"
>> with "There exist already"
>
> I have overwritten this, as my grammar dictionary told me: "There existS
> already ..." + singular

"a number of URI schemes" is not singular...

Let's also remove the "already", which makes it sound silly.


>> Section 8.3.2.2 MPEG-7
>>
>> * 8.3.2.2.2 should add after the example what it actually describes.
>> Something like: "This MPEG-7 example describes a spatial mask called
>> "speaker" which is given by the coordinates (40, 300), (105,210),
>> (???), (320,240)." (and can somebody please clarify what that middle
>> bit is?)
>
> "???" meant to be "..." for reflecting the complete definition of the
> polygon.

If it's a polygon, it could be any point. None of the given points
line up with each other, so I don't think there is a clear way to work
out what the missing point is supposed to be. May I suggest using
something more obvious like (40, 300), (40,210), (???), (320,300) -
then the missing point is obivously (320, 210). Or am I
misunderstanding coordinates?


Cheers,
Silvia.
Received on Tuesday, 14 April 2009 14:33:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:33 GMT