Reply from M. Yonge, AES Standards Secretary, 2011-08-10, to comments received from Mr. I. Rudd, 2011-06-17
"Dear Ian,
I see that Chris Chambers has replied to the substantive matters in your comments of 2011-06-17. I am replying here to the editorial matters. To complement this, please find attached a PDF document "aes60-cfc-comments-ed-reply-110811.pdf" that lists your comments and my proposed editorial actions. I believe that all your comments will have been addressed by either David's responses or mine.
Please let me know by 2011-08-26 if you have any further comments on these points.
Sincerely,
Mark Yonge, AES standards secretary"
Original comments in plain text; secretariat responses in coloured text.
Item
Comment
Specific comments:
3
Page 1 Abstract Paragraph 2: " ... is also provided in case this metadata would be implemented - for example in archive exchange projects - using the Open Archive Initiative's Protocol ..." The parenthetical use of the dashes leads to the unintended limitation of using the metadata only for the Open Archive Initiative's Protocol, but this is (surely!) not intended. Removing that limitation, using a more natural form of expression and touching-up the syntax, I suggest: " ... is also provided to allow this metadata to be used in, for example, archive-exchange [NB hyphen] projects which use the Open Archive Initiative's Protocol ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
4
Page 4 Introduction: Typos: Paragraph 4: "cultural heritage databases" should be "cultural-heritage databases" ...
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
5
... and "broadcasting" in two places should be "broadcast".
Not agreed - the purpose of these systems and repositories is broadcasting - they are not themselves broadcast.
6
Page 5 Section 0.1: Typo: "Examples are show ..." should be: "Examples are shown ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
7
Page 5 Section 1 Paragraph 2: " ... is also provided in case this metadata would be implemented - for example in archive exchange projects - using the Open Archive Initiative's Protocol ..." The parenthetical use of the dashes leads to the unintended limitation of using the metadata only for the Open Archive Initiative's Protocol, but this is (surely!) not intended. Removing that limitation, using a more natural form of expression and touching-up the syntax, I suggest: " ... is also provided to allow this metadata to be used in, for example, archive-exchange [NB hyphen] projects which use the Open Archive Initiative's Protocol ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
8
Page 5 Section 2: ISO 15836: 2009 The document is here (payment required to obtain it): http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm? csnumber=52142
(and other URL comments)
Noting Chris Chambers' reply on this and subsequent comments concerned with URLs, informative links will be checked to be current at the time of publication.
14
Page 6 Section 4.1.3: " ... an XLM-schema [sic] thus the data [...] XML-documents. The structure [...] will typical be something like:". should be improved to: " ... an XML schema. Thus, the data [...] XML documents. The structure [...] will be typically something such as:".
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
15
Page 7 Section 4.1.4.1 Paragraph 2: "Reference data identified above is proposed by default but can be ..." Where is "above"? I suggest: "The reference data identified in section 4.2 is proposed by default but it [NB] can be ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
16
Page 7 Section 4.1.4.1 Paragraph 2: " ... in the case of exchange ..." is more naturally expressed as: " ... for exchange ..."
Not agreed - this is a specific case, but not the only one.
17
Paragraph 3: " ... it is recommended to use predefined 'relations' ..." is more naturally expressed as: " ... it is recommended that predefined 'relations' be used ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
18
Alas, I am not sufficiently familiar with the terminology of the European Digital Library, but I think that 'relationships' is probably what is meant instead of 'relations'.
Not agreed - either term would probably be adequate, but this is the wording in the equivalent EBU document and it would be unwise to make a change without a stronger reason.
19
Page 7 Section 4.1.4.2.2 "This group is only associated to a title ..." would be expressed better as: "This group is associated with only a title ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
21
Page 8 Paragraph 3: "This resolution method is left to the appreciation of each recipient." I think what is meant is: "The resolution method is left to the discretion of each recipient".
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
22
Page 8 Figure 2: The "??" after "IETF" can be removed.
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
25
Annex A: " ... contribute to OAI (open Architecture Initiative) for metadata harvesting." Bearing in mind the document's Abstract and Scope, probably what is meant: " ... contribute to the OAI (Open Architecture Initiative) Protocol for Metadata Harvesting."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
26
Annex A: "... in case the schema urn would not be present ..." would be expressed better as: "... in case the schema urn is not present ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
27
Annex A: " ... associated to ..." would be expressed better as: " ... associated with ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
28
Typo: "Resource related information ..." should be "Resource-related information ..."
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
29
Annex C: I can see that there is a problem with the layout of the "Aliases" and the links on a portrait-oriented page. If the portrait orientation is to be maintained, the inset of the link on the next line (as in the first item and - most of - the genre sub-section) works well and creating a table with alternate items shaded might help too. E.g. ebu_TitleStatusCodeCS http://www.ebu.ch/metadata/cs/web/ebu_TitleStatusCodeCS_p.xml.htm ebu_RoleCodeCS http://www.ebu.ch/metadata/cs/web/ebu_RoleCodeCS_p.xml.htm Library of Congress Subject Heading (LCSH) [link required] Consistency of layout - including typeface convention - is required though. Numerous links are still required. I don't know all the refinements required so as be able to help.
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
30
Annex F: Consistency of layout with Annex C (however it is done) would be useful. This Annex exhibits a variety of styles and typefaces.
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
34
IOC: This is a broken link and anyway, I'm not sure why it is here, for I see no reference to the IOC, Olympic or Olympics (never mind the UK's participation) in the document (and nor do any of those terms appear in EBU Core v1.2). Remove it.
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
41
IETF RFC 3339: This is cited (correctly) as a Normative Reference (Section 2) and so needs to be removed from here.
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
42
W3C Date and Time Format: This Format is cited in the document and so needs to be moved to the Normative References in Section 2.
Not agreed - W3C Date and Time Format appears in this document only as external reference data - and is not normative to the core.
43
MIME media type registry: This link appeared in Annex C and so it can be removed from this Annex.
Agreed - will be amended editorially before publication.
