Response to your LC Comment -2406 on Media API spec

Dear Doug,

The Media Annotations Working Group has reviewed the comments you sent 
[1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the API for Media Resource 1.0 
published on 08 June 2010.
Thank you for having taken the time to review the document and to send 
us comments.

The Working Group's response to your comment is included below.
Please review it carefully and *let us know by email at
public-media-annotation@w3.org if you agree with it or not
before [09-Oct-2010]*.
In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide a specific 
solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group.
If such a consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the 
opportunity to raise a formal objection which will
then be reviewed by the Director during the transition of this document 
to the next stage in the W3C Recommendation Track.

Thanks,

For the Media Annotations Working Group,
Thierry Michel,
W3C Team Contact

1. 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2010Jul/0016.html
2. http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-20100608

-----------------------
Resolution of the MAWG:
-----------------------

Looking at the document you seem to have revised, according to your URIs 
in you comment message,
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-mediaont-10-20100309/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-20100309/
These documents are not the latest versions of our specifications, and 
not the versions for the Last Call Review.Please refer to "Last Call 
Working Drafts transition announcement of the API and Ontology for Media 
Resource 1.0"
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2010Jun/0050.html
The Media Annotations Working Group has done a lot of improvements and 
changes since, especially on the mediaont-api-1.0-20100309 version, and 
probably you would find satisfaction in our latest LC documents
* http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-mediaont-api-1.0-20100608/
* http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-mediaont-10-20100608/

We agree that there is always space for improvement, therefore we have 
added a clarification note on the fact that we consider different values 
for the properties according to different source formats, languages, 
subtypes and tracks.

Finally we have send to you an invitation to join a MAWG telcon sometime 
to discuss them further, unfortunately we did not get any response from you.

Received on Wednesday, 29 September 2010 07:11:31 UTC