Re: review the 6 LC comments pending

> 2405: I guess the answer should say: "we changed this" and not "we  
> will
> change this".

well, the changes are not implemented yet, but will be before we go  
for another round of LC comments. This is what was decided at the last  
F2F if I'm not mistaken?

>  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?

In the beginning of the document, stating the scope of the document.  
It was not in the previous version, so if you don't have access to  
documents being edited, you can't see it...

> 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?

In lots of places unfortunately (search the document for "namespace"  
and you'll see it's used several times in an inapropriate way) and I  
am now correcting it. It has to be done sometime, right? The answer  
says that we agree with the proposed changes and are implementing them  
currently, as opposed to some comments we disagree with and will not  
implement the suggested changes and propose an alternative instead.

Sorry for not reacting before, I only now understood that the numbers  
refer to the LC responses Chris was commenting on!

Véro
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>