Deliverable Review Form

Identification of the deliverable or milestone
Project: EMI Deliverable or milestone identifier: Dx.y.z
Title: ______________________ Doc. identifier: EMI-DXXX-CDSREF-Title-vx.x
Author(s): __________________ Due date: __

Identification of the reviewer
Name: _____________________ Affiliation: ____ EMI Activity/External project or Institute: ______

Review date mm/dd/yyyy
Author(s) revision date mm/dd/yyyy
Reviewer acceptance date mm/dd/yyyy

Attach the reviewed document to the deliverable page, put here a link

General comments

@Alberto, my initial comments:

* Suggest to change Chapter 4 to Conclusion (even if work was largely QC related). This is a QA and QC deliverable, after all.

* Suggest to add a chapter on Outlook and post-EMI plans.

* Executive summary: "Following the advice of the Reviewers the information already reported in the previous deliverables, describing the policies and metrics, has been reduced and replaced to very short summaries and references to the complete information." Suggest to simply say Policies and metrics which have not changed in the third year are summarized and references to the complete information is included. Reviewers have asked us, on one hand not to repeat information, and on another hand, to give a complete document with all information included.

Additional recommendations (not affecting the document content, e.g. recommendation for future work)

Detailed comments on the content

Note 1: The reviewers must list here any observation they want to track explicitly and that require interaction with the authors
Alternatively all changes must be listed in the document itself using Word change tracking features (if you use Word)
Note 2: These comments have to be explicitly addressed by the authors and the action taken must be clearly described

N Page Section Observations and Replies Is Addressed?
1 xx x.y Sequence of comments and replies separated by twiki signature and date    
2          
3          
4          

Any other modification, spelling or grammatical corrections, etc must be done directly in the document using tracked changes or similar mechanisms that allows the authors to identify which correction is suggested.

-- AlbertoDiMeglio - 12-Jul-2010


This topic: EMI > WebHome > EmiDocuments > EmiDeliverables > DeliverableDSA234 > ReviewDSA234FE
Topic revision: r2 - 2013-05-22 - unknown
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright & 2008-2020 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
or Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? use Discourse or Send feedback