Evaluation of Sustainability Principles in Adaptable Re-Functioning: Traditional Residences in Demirel Complex
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Abstract and Introduction should be better organized and presented in a clear way. There are two sections named Results and in general text and images are not well aligned. Table 1 is not very clear for the reader. In general, it is not very clear presented what is your goal and how it is achieved.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
The revisions recommended have been applied to our text and submitted for your kind information.
Best Reggards,
A. Durukan
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The article is interesting and well presented and it fits the theme of the issue.
The authors could mention the importance of trying to control the performance of historic buildings by the management of the building itself (passive control before active and invasive restoration interventions).
The discussion and conclusions chapter is missing.
some format of the ms need checking:
- the section title: "and, in, of" should not be capitalized.
- spaces in some places are not necessary, please check and revise.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
The revisions recommended have been applied to our text and submitted for your kind information.
Best Reggards,
A. Durukan
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
This MS discussed the renewal of building materials and typology and sustainability created by re-functioning by evaluating three basic principles.
1.The appearance and quality of the work would be improved with a more careful treatment of the photographs, diagrams and drawings provided in the survey of the documented buildings.
2. Some sentences are not so clear: page 4 "According to this, Bromley et al. According to [27],"
3. English in some places should be checked: page 17 "On the first floor of the building, the part where the stove is located in the anteroom area as been raised from the ground"
4. in these figures, (a)(b)(c)should be further explained.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
The revisions recommended have been applied to our text and submitted for your kind information.
Best Reggards,
A. Durukan
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Tables 5,6, 11 are not formatted in a correct way, please check it and make it consistent.
Again, there are two sections named Results and there is no Conclusion. Also Section 6 is not well aligned.
Author Response
Dear Reveiwer,
The requested revisions have been applied and it submitted to you for your kind revisions. If these revisions are not the answer for your comments please specify the request again. We had difficullties to understand the requested revision especially for table 6. We hope that the revision that we send now would suit enough. If not please write us.
Thanks for your kind help
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
