--- a/model/comments/issue-438-khalid.txt	Tue Jul 10 23:31:58 2012 +0100
+++ b/model/comments/issue-438-khalid.txt	Tue Jul 10 23:48:33 2012 +0100
@@ -46,11 +46,16 @@
    >   one of id, entity, time, and attributes must be present." However,
    >   according to the definition of Usage in [12], the activity
    >   identifier is not optional.
+
+correct, the activity identifier is not optional
+
    > 
    > - Section 3.2.1, defines derivation as: [17] derivationExpression ::=
    >  "wasDerivedFrom" "(" optionalIdentifier eIdentifier "," eIdentifier (
    >  "," aIdentifierOrMarker "," gIdentifierOrMarker ","
    >  uIdentifierOrMarker )? optionalAttributeValuePairs ")"
+
+
    >  
    >  I may be wrong, but the ( "," aIdentifierOrMarker ","
    >  gIdentifierOrMarker "," uIdentifierOrMarker )?  means that either all
@@ -62,12 +67,22 @@
    > eIdentifier "," eIdentifier ( "," aIdentifierOrMarker)?  (","
    > gIdentifierOrMarker ")? (," uIdentifierOrMarker )?
    > optionalAttributeValuePairs ")"
+
+No, we went for a all-or-nothing approach for optionals.
    > 
    > - Looking at the definition of Revision, Quotation and Primary source,
    >   I am wondering if it would make sense to say something about the
    >   kind of derivation in the derivationExpression, to state that it may
    >   contain an additional optional element that specifies the kind of
    >   derivation.
+
+This is already said in prov-dm, and we just wanted to have the minimum 
+necessary to explain the syntax.
+
+
+Thanks,
+Luc
+
    > 
    > Khalid
    > 

--- a/model/comments/issue-438-tom.txt	Tue Jul 10 23:31:58 2012 +0100
+++ b/model/comments/issue-438-tom.txt	Tue Jul 10 23:48:33 2012 +0100
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
    > following expressions, the optional activity a is specified along with
    > the generation and usage identifiers g2 and u1:"
 
-example 2 has changed? issue no longer applies
+Text was updated.
 
    > 
    > - 2.2 EBNF Grammar
@@ -26,12 +26,15 @@
    >  activityExpression etc., This sentence is a bit weird. Should the
    >  first "expression" be omitted?
 
-already fixed 
+Sentence was fixed
 
    > 
    > - 2.5 Comments
    > typo: "cooments" (is fixed in latest editors draft I think)
    > 
+
+done
+
    > - 3.1.4 - 3.1.8 
    > 
    > Even though the production usageExpression allows for expressions

--- a/model/prov-n.html	Tue Jul 10 23:31:58 2012 +0100
+++ b/model/prov-n.html	Tue Jul 10 23:48:33 2012 +0100
@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@
           // if your specification has a subtitle that goes below the main
           // formal title, define it here
         //          subtitle   :  "About-to-be-frozen WD4 (for internal release)",
-          subtitle   :  "Final review before Last Call Vote (<a href=\"diff-n.html\">Diffs since last release</a>)",
+          subtitle   :  "Version for Last Call Vote (<a href=\"diff-n.html\">Diffs since last release</a>)",
 
           // if you wish the publication date to be other than today, set this
 //           publishDate:  "2012-05-03",