Engaging Users in Resource Ecosystem Building for Local Heritage-Led Knowledge

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The text is correct, I think it should be published in the journal, it needs a minor revision.

First, I detect an error in the citation of the text in line 72 article 16 is cited and then the quoted text corresponds to text 27, so it is recommended that the text be ordered correctly.

Secondly, the results need to be detailed with greater precision, it is now a very short description and can cause readers to not understand the text correctly.

Thirdly, in the discussion it is only compared with an article, I think that improving this section will greatly improve the text, it is necessary to hold a discussion with a greater number of articles.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

the improvements we introduced are as follows:

• We have corrected the numeric order of the bibliography, (I detect an error in the citation of the text.)
• We have substantially improved the results section by adding and discussing more references, elaborating on the concrete results, and identifying the scientific gap that our research fulfils (the results need to be detailed with greater precision.)
• We have included more references discussed them in the discussion session (it is necessary to hold a discussion with a greater number of articles.)

Reviewer 2 Report

I read the article with great interest; I would suggest only a small integration to better understand the functioning and application potential of the platform analyzed in the research project.

4. Results

It is suggested to insert some other image with the "screen" of the platform to better understand its functioning and application potential. Furthermore, it would be interesting to investigate the functioning of interactive tools.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

the improvements we introduced are as follows:

• We have included the RRE landing page with an example of the pop-up window explaining the tools in Figure 2 and the screenshot of the Atlas tool in Figure 3 to exemplify the design of intuitive engagements with the RRE tools. Moreover, RRE is an open ecosystem and available online for investigating the functionality of interactive tools (It is suggested to insert some other image with the "screen" of the platform to better understand its functioning and application potential. Furthermore, it would be interesting to investigate the functioning of interactive tools.)

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have done a good job.

However, the paper can be further improved by addressing the following points.

The discussion section of the paper should be linked to the literature.

How has this research contributed in filling the gap in the knowledge? 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

the improvements we introduced are as follows:

• Discussion section has been substantially improved, more references are added and discussed according to the research outputs (The discussion section of the paper should be linked to the literature.)
• The knowledge gap fulfilled by our research has been clarified with the new paragraph at the end of the results section (How has this research contributed in filling the gap in the knowledge?).