RE: Feedback on the SMIL 3.0 LCWD specification from the Multimodal Interaction WG LC 1834, LC 1835, LC 1836

Dear Thierry,
Thank you for your response to our comments and for your summary of
the TPAC discussion. We agree with your responses to our comments
1834, 1835, and 1836. We do have one follow-up comment regarding
potential future discussions related to 1834 and MMI/SMIL use 
cases, noted inline.

best regards,

Debbie Dahl, MMIWG Chair


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-mmi-wg-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-mmi-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Thierry Michel
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 9:53 AM
> To: www-smil; Kazuyuki Ashimura; w3c-mmi-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Feedback on the SMIL 3.0 LCWD specification from the 
> Multimodal Interaction WG LC 1834, LC 1835, LC 1836
> 
> 
> Kazuyuki,
> 
> During the discussion with the Multi-modal WG at the TPAc we have
> discussed general terms about integration issues.
> 
> The resolution was that you would send us a number of 
> representative use
> cases for identify requirements on integration issues, but we have not
> received these yet.
> 
> There are 3 LC comments for which we have send resolutions 
> and for which
> we need your agreement.
> 
> Please acknowledge our response.
> 
> The resolutions are:
> LC 1834: "this comments do not require any modification in 
> SMIL 3.0; the
> resolution is to held an inter-workpackage meeting in order to further
> discuss the different alternatives of integration"
> which was held

During the joint discussion at the TP we agreed that 
both WG's would very much like to discuss the issue of integrating SMIL with
MMI.  However, the MMIWG agrees that this integration can be deferred for
the time
being. The MMIWG also plans to supply use cases for integrating MMI with 
SMIL to assist in SYMM's development of future requirements.

> 
> LC 1835: a number of changes in the specs (already done) as 
> specified in
> the response comment (see previous email for response from 
> the SYMM WG).
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-smil/2007OctDec/0075.html
> 
> LC 1836:
> The Working Group agrees that using IRIs instead of URIs is a 
> good thing
> and has resolved to adopt the proposal.
> 
> We will add a (normative) note that the term URI needs to be 
> read as IRI
> throughout the specification.
> 
> Your initial comment is available at.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-smil/2007JulSep/0068.html
> 
> 
> 
> On behalf of the SYMM WG,
> Thierry Michel
> 
>

Received on Monday, 28 January 2008 15:16:44 UTC