Review must identify video version and segment; a comment resolved on a previous cut does not close a note on the new edit.
Index
A request to change a scene loses precision when staff receive text without knowing the reviewed cut and timing.
The rule that changes the scope
Review must identify video version and segment; a comment resolved on a previous cut does not close a note on the new edit.
A review platform may provide markers; customization supports customer approval and deliveries in different formats.
A comment can describe an intention rather than just a time point. Retain the viewed segment so staff understand the note when the edit changes. Vertical and horizontal formats may use the same scene with different framing; acceptance should not propagate without a rule. Request a duration change that shifts several comments and check how reviewers locate the new context without losing the original scene they were discussing.
Specify operational deliverables
- Link a comment to the instant or interval viewed by the customer.
- Separate a requested change, its implementation and review on the following version.
- Keep acceptance of one format without automatically applying it to other adaptations.
Test the exception before acceptance
In a hypothetical scenario, a new cut moves the commented scene; staff must locate the original intention and request checking at its current position.
Reference for assessing scope
NN/g: writing task scenarios for usability testing
Prepare your project with Quantum9
Bring two video cuts and a comment that had to be explained again.