version update?

[bmcfee]

Just making an issue for the record.

The SPAM annotations still have v1.0 in their annotation metadata fields. I think they've been changed sufficiently to warrant a minor revision (1.1).

Is there anything else that should be changed prior to the next version?

[urinieto]

Good point. I think in terms of annotations this should be enough.

I am probably gonna compute the features with the new msaf 0.1.0 format,
but this shouldn't have any impact on the annotations themselves.

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:08 AM, Brian McFee notifications@github.com
wrote:

Just making an issue for the record.

The SPAM annotations still have v1.0 in their annotation metadata fields.
I think they've been changed sufficiently to warrant a minor revision (1.1).

Is there anything else that should be changed prior to the next version?

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#4, or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ADhisdrZL4ISKXjTMQEm-juz7PqMuoyCks5qMAdwgaJpZM4I2ZWB
.

[bmcfee]

Maybe unrelated: it seems really weird to have annotators' full names and email addresses (!) included in the jams files. Are you sure that's cool with irb?

[urinieto]

I believe it was ok for them to have the contact available. I will contact
them just to make sure.

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Brian McFee notifications@github.com
wrote:

Maybe unrelated: it seems really weird to have annotators' full names and
email addresses (!) included in the jams files. Are you sure that's cool
with irb?

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#4 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ADhisRNKQ4frOBL5I_d61w0CWXDPS8T8ks5qMDwIgaJpZM4I2ZWB
.

[urinieto]

Files updated to 1.1 in 4ed1dc0 (even though some of them don't contain multi-segment annotations --see #5--), so I'm leaving this open until we fix that.