http://fm.ea-tel.eu/flashmedia/flashmeeting/fm14951_f5fac4-14951 http://fm.ea-tel.eu/fm/memo.php?pwd=f5fac4-14951 http://fm.ea-tel.eu/public lom 0:5322:0 0:5309:0 1:5338:0 7:20:0 8:1168:0 1178:3531:0 3541:5339:0 35:5307:0 41:5311:0 46:240:0 314:5304:0 64:196:0 268:5310:0 104:973:0 984:5316:0 1718:5304:0 Schawn is here, camera and mic not working - I can here everyone so far OK, Schawn! Christian? Stefaan? No audio, Stefaan! camera and headset not working, will go out and try again no audio for me too now i hear you erik yes, working the mic issue no problem to hear you Erik Can hear you fine! Yes, thanks for the reminder! yes I did vote already I did not receive any e-mail by IEEE today then i have missed it not a member I was not a member of the original ballot group, so Dan's explanation (re-circulation) makes sense I have not received any email. I agree -- it's not clear OK -- I remember now I see a cover letter -- didn't read it it is mainly an answer to comments that were made ok if you can forward this e-mail to me that would be great! no, can someone send it to me (thropps@adlnet.gov) yes it is, version 3 will do, schawn! include me (stefaan.ternier@gmail.com) and stefaan :-) thx :-) No, Can you send it to me too please david.massart@eun.org No microphone today. Include me in the mailing too. tom@twason.com done everybody received it? got it it was sent on october 6th i think there were two other meetings at least that are not at the wiki we should group the meeting links somewhere let's talk about links to meetings and wiki under topic 4 for today maybe to add all? participants at 2008-04-10: Javier Gody, Jeroen Hamers, Christian M. Stracke, Andy Heath, Dan Rehak, Tom Wason Yes, thanks. thropps@ctc.com - try this email Yes I can send it by skype, Schawn, but don't see you there? Javier keep going, I will work with Erik to get it. just sent it to thropps@ctc.com as well http://standards.ieee.org/guides/style/section3.html Yes! rules (plural) vs. applies (singular) ok Agree with Erik I agree (applied) yes, it was a typo, "applied" intended ok, fair no problem... agree1 ok, agree thanks yes That statement does not seem clear to me, not sure what it is adding http://ariadne.cs.kuleuven.be/mediawiki/index.php/LOM_v1.0_Corrigenda#Issue_.2311 The link for me is not working My problems is that the statement does not read clearly. Sure, I understand the change, justnot the wording claifies intent -- I need to look at original LOM I meant something like " - "Whereas an object may have multiple components in different formats and thus 4.1:Technical.Format has size greater than 1, and whereas one object may have multiple locations, and therefor 4.3:Technical.Location has a size greater than 1, an object can only have one size and therefor the size of 4.2:Technical.Size is 1." but see the point of what Dan is saying... That would be OK OK fine with me too fine with me question: Once approved, will the corrigenda remain a separate document or will the original standard be corrected? I agree with Erik and Dan: the specification should stand by itself. It describes what not why. Is it possibled ot create a parallel annotated, version of the spec? This would be parrt of a best practices guide. There are also "best practice" documents in IEEE process I think. More opinions? i think we all agreed that the text should be changed OR deleted ok, i will send version 4 soon http://dublincore.org/educationwiki/DCMIIEEELTSCTaskforce Thanks for the great work, Javier: much appreciated! Thanks you Erik http://ltsc.ieee.org/xsd/lomv1.0/ - lots of things here Thx! already done :-) thx Thanks Thanks bye thanks, bye thanks bya Bye bye bye thanks, bye bye