A Multidisciplinary Approach for the Conservation Design of the Medieval Fortress of Vogogna from the Analysis to the Valorization of the Archeological Site

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is scientifically interesting and overall coherent. It is clear that the work derives from a broader and more detailed thesis project, which has made it somewhat difficult to condense into a concise paper and, above all, to achieve a fully consistent translation from Italian. This has led to a few linguistic and structural issues that should be addressed before publication.

First of all, I would suggest revising and improving the structure of the sub-chapters. After the Materials and Methodssection, the numbering and hierarchy of the subsequent sub-sections become inconsistent and should be clarified.

In general, I recommend a thorough revision of the English language throughout the manuscript. Several sentences that were particularly awkward have been annotated directly in the PDF. Special attention should be given to the use of the term disabled, which is now considered ethically outdated; people with disabilities would be more appropriate.

In some points—also highlighted in the annotated PDF—I suggested adding additional bibliographic references, although the overall bibliography is adequate.

As a climber, I particularly appreciated the section proposing a potential reuse of the site as a climbing area; however, as an archaeologist, I believe that a more detailed discussion of the potential risks (especially regarding the use of the fortress walls for anchors and belays) and possible mitigation measures would be advisable.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

R. The sentence is grammatically understandable but not idiomatic in English. Consider rephrasing it for clarity and fluency, for example:
“The aim of the study is to assess whether the fortress ruins can play a strategic role within the broader heritage enhancement plan proposed by the municipality of Vogogna, fostering stronger links with the tourism opportunities provided by the Val Grande National Park, to which the town belongs.”

A. The authors thank the reviewer for the useful suggestion for improving the quality of the text. The sentence was rrephrased according to the suggested text.

R. I would modify the number of this sub-section (3.1) and also add the number to the following sub-section, and setting them in italics to distinguish them from the main sections and improve overall clarity.

A. The authors wish to tank the reviewer for the indication: the organization of the sections was reorganized following the proposed layout.

R. “Capital” sounds too strong for a small settlement. Consider replacing it with “administrative centre” or “seat of power,” which better convey the historical meaning of a local power hub.

A. The authors thank the reviewer for providing this detailed observatiion: the word was changed as suggested.

R. Page 5, line 163. The sentence is understandable but not fully idiomatic. Suggested revision: “In the medieval period, the main cities under Visconti rule replicated the civic model of the Broletto Palace, a building used for public functions.”

A. The authors thank express again their gratitude to the reviewer for the suggestions.

R. Page 6, line 178. Consider rewording for clarity and idiomatic English, for example: “The antagonism between the southern Swiss cities, Domodossola, and Vogogna is documented by frequent military sieges.”

A. The authors thank the reviewer for this continuos attention on the quality of the text that was improved according to the indicated solution.

R. Page 6, lines 184-188. Missing citations.

A. The authors thank the reviewer for this remark. The contents were referenced with additionals references.

R. Renumbering of the sections and subsections.

A. The authors thank the reviewer for the active effort in improving the order of the subsections. According to the suggestions provided by the reviewer for clarifying the role of sections and subsections, the authors think that the relevance detailed analyses carried out through on-field activities and archive research can constitute a separate section of the work, with dedicated sub-section for each aspect of the proposed insights. Thus, section no. 4 entitled "Detailed analyses of the Vogogna Fortress" is proposed. Geometrical survey, historical analysis, materials and decays analysis became subsections of the new 4th section of the work.

R. page 13, line 429-430. The sentence is understandable but grammatically awkward. Consider rephrasing for clarity and fluency, e.g.: “Her study identifies ten main construction phases, showing a progressive enlargement of the defensive walls, the square tower, and its buttress, culminating in the addition of the round towers.”

A. The authors wish to renovate their gratitude to the reviewer for the indications to improve the quality of the language.

R. page 14, line 479. It would be useful to add a few example citations.

A. The authors wish to tank the reviewer for this useful indication, two new references were added to support the assumption.

R. page 16, lines 514-518. The sentence is overly long and syntactically awkward. Consider rephrasing for clarity and fluency, for example: “Although the Borromeo family maintained their hegemony over the territories surrounding Lake Maggiore, including Arona and Angera, and the Ossola Valley with Vogogna and Domodossola, after the fall of the Duchy of Milan and the arrival of foreign powers, their defensive system was reorganized during a relatively peaceful period, first under the Spanish crown and later under Austrian rule, which ensured the end of hostilities in the area.”

A. The authors wish to thank the reviewer for providing this suggstion for inmproving the quality of the language.

R. page 19, line 169. It would be useful to add a few example citations

A. Two main references were added as general address to the stone conservation method.

R. page 22, line 728,729. The sentence is understandable but not idiomatic (“services by electric cars,” “visitors with disability,” “guarantee the transportation”). Consider rephrasing for clarity and fluency, e.g.: According to the site’s topography, electric shuttle services or lift systems are used to ensure accessibility for visitors with disabilities in these protected areas.

A. The authors wish to thank the reviewer for the contant improvement of the quality of the text.

R. Page 22, line 748,749. Grammatically correct, but “the disabled” is outdated in formal English. Consider using “people with disabilities” instead for inclusivity and modern usage.

A. The authors appriciate the checking on outdated words and agreed in update the language.

R. page 26, lines 829-831. The sentence is understandable but not idiomatic. Suggested revision: “The work was based on the integration of different lines of research concerning the historical evolution of the building, its geometry, material components, and the conservation state of its main structures, in order to deepen the understanding of the monument.”

A. The authors wish to thank the reviewr for the proactive efforts in improving the quality of the text. All the suggestions were precious.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper deals with the always interesting subject of documenting and promoting the cultural heritage of less known monuments and isolated areas. It is well-written and in understandable language and no obvious mistakes were found. Although the proposed methodology is not something new to the scientific community, the application and the object itself seem very interesting.

Some minor changes are needed. Moreover, some re-arrangements should be done concerning the text. These are as follows:

Line 37 & line 67: figure 1. It will be more helpful to move the figure closer to line 37 where it is first mentioned.

lines 99-101: "...the common survey techniques, like direct measurements and photogrammetry, are here difficult to apply due to the irregular condition of the ground...". The authors write that photogrammetry was difficult to apply, but later the describe that they used images taken from a AUV, which is a photogrammetric procedure.. Obviously they meant "terrestrial photogrammetry was difficult to apply"... 

Chapter 4 (Short description of the case study and its context) is suggested to be completely re-arranged: It begins with the interesting part of historic facts about the city of Vogogna (157-200) and its current situation (201-282). Then it jumps to the geometric surveying of the complex (283-389) and jumps back to the historic information of the fortress (390-570). Historical data for both the wider area and the complex should be organized together in the same chapter in different sub-chapters. The same should apply for the geometric surveying the and conservation procedures, as the second are in close dependent to the results of the surveying.

Finally it seems there is a problem with the numbering of the chapters. Till chapter 4, all chapters have a number. But later on, there is no numbering in the headings so it is no clear if the headings are sub-chapters of chapter 4 (e.g. 4.1, 4.2 etc.) or different chapter (5, 6 etc.). Moreover, the final chapter "conclusions", also lacks numbering.

Author Response

Reviewer 02. The paper deals with the always interesting subject of documenting and promoting the cultural heritage of less known monuments and isolated areas. It is well-written and in understandable language and no obvious mistakes were found. Although the proposed methodology is not something new to the scientific community, the application and the object itself seem very interesting.

Authors. The authors wish to thank the Reviewer for the useful indications provided for improving the quality of the work.

 

Reviewer 02. Some minor changes are needed. Moreover, some re-arrangements should be done concerning the text. These are as follows:

Authors. The authors wish to thank the reviewer for the detailed list of points containing various aspects to rearrange or integrate for providing more clarity and reliability to the contents.

 

Reviewer 02. Line 37 & line 67: figure 1. It will be more helpful to move the figure closer to line 37 where it is first mentioned.

Authors. The authors agree that it would be more convenient to place the first figure close to the paragraph where it is mentioned and modified its position to match this suggestion.

 

Reviewer 02. lines 99-101: "...the common survey techniques, like direct measurements and photogrammetry, are here difficult to apply due to the irregular condition of the ground...". The authors write that photogrammetry was difficult to apply, but later they describe that they used images taken from a AUV, which is a photogrammetric procedure. Obviously, they meant "terrestrial photogrammetry was difficult to apply"... 

Authors. The authors express their gratitude to the reviewer for this remark. The sentence was rephrased as follows: “Although laser scanning was considered the most reliable technique for obtaining the geometrical model of the fortress, the steep terrain and dense vegetation made it necessary to use a drone unit to survey the entire site”.

 

Reviewer 02. Chapter 4 (Short description of the case study and its context) is suggested to be completely re-arranged: It begins with the interesting part of historic facts about the city of Vogogna (157-200) and its current situation (201-282). Then it jumps to the geometric surveying of the complex (283-389) and jumps back to the historic information of the fortress (390-570). Historical data for both the wider area and the complex should be organized together in the same chapter in different sub-chapters. The same should apply for the geometric surveying the and conservation procedures, as the second are in close dependent to the results of the surveying.

Authors. The authors wish to thank the reviewer for these important considerations. The arguments were arranged in this way according to a precise flow of contents that includes a first general description of the area of Vogogna and the role played in the past time in the Ossola Valley. As it will be remarked in the next comment, the sections of the manuscript were delivered with some lacks in the sequence of the numbering, and the authors guess that the correct relationship between paragraphs and subparagraphs was ambiguous. This version of the manuscript contains a general rearrangement of the various sections that should now be clearer in the flow of the contents. The section no. 3, “Materials and goals”, is now including the sub-sections 3.1, “Short description of the case study and its context”, and 3.2, “The countermeasures against the negative socio-economic trend in Ossola Valley”. This part of the work focuses on the relationship of the Fortress with its context, including the necessary information for picturing the rich past of the zone and the negative period (from economic and social point of view) that drove to the lack of resources for the correct protection of the archaeological site. The historical references are here used to frame the proposed case study with the necessary historical references for interpreting its values. The authors agree that on the further sections, some historical indications are repeated, but the rearrangement of the paragraph should now be more balanced in indicating that the third section is set to make the peculiar context of Vogogna and Val d'Ossola more familiar to the reader, whilst the further 4^th section, entitled “Detailed analyses of the Vogogna Fortress” is dedicated to the analysis carried out on the object of the study. Thus, subparagraph 4.1 “Geometrical survey of the complex” introduces the 3D geometrical model obtained by the advanced survey, and the description of the model and its complex characteristics was used as a base knowledge for better understanding the historical evolution of the complex described in sub-paragraph 4.2 “Historical analysis of the fortress”. The articulation of the 4^th section is concluded by the sub-paragraph 4.3, “Analysis of materials and decays to set the conservation procedures for the fortress”, where the refined elevations obtained by the advanced geometrical survey, specifically dated according to the historical analysis, are used for the mapping of materials and decays. Section 5 is dedicated to “Discussion on the valorization principles for the reuse design of the fortress”. The authors believe that this organization can work, but any further observation and feedback are welcome.

 

Reviewer 02. Finally it seems there is a problem with the numbering of the chapters. Till chapter 4, all chapters have a number. But later on, there is no numbering in the headings so it is no clear if the headings are sub-chapters of chapter 4 (e.g. 4.1, 4.2 etc.) or different chapter (5, 6 etc.). Moreover, the final chapter "conclusions", also lacks numbering.

Authors. As explained in the previous point, the authors totally agree with this remark. We apologize for the lack of numbers in the titles: it is a mistake noticed also by the other reviews. We really appreciate the effort mature by the reviewer for guiding the corrections and providing to us the chance for improving the clarity of the manuscript.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I believe that if we do not give a use to the cultural patrimony, in this case the medieval fortress ruin of Vogogna, there is no point in preserving it. This use can be economic, cultural, social, political, and in this particular case, for tourist activities (which in some way is also financial, social, and political). In general, the authors make an excellent article that shows how a considered "ruin" can be put into use by its conservation, renovation, and redirection of new activities on it. From the architectural perspective, the proposed project is a commendable one. I like the proposal, especially how a modern renovation is possible. 

From the anthropological point of view, I think a little discussion about the use of cultural patrimony to revitalize communities and help the economic scenarios is necessary. To set a line or a warning not to transform the patrimony into a mediatic show to satisfy a tourist. 

Figures: love it, very good ones. 

Author Response

Reviewer 03. I believe that if we do not give a use to the cultural patrimony, in this case the medieval fortress ruin of Vogogna, there is no point in preserving it. This use can be economic, cultural, social, political, and in this particular case, for tourist activities (which in some way is also financial, social, and political). In general, the authors make an excellent article that shows how a considered "ruin" can be put into use by its conservation, renovation, and redirection of new activities on it. From the architectural perspective, the proposed project is a commendable one. I like the proposal, especially how a modern renovation is possible.

Authors. The authors wish to thank the reviewer for sharing his opinion, revealing a unanimous position on the role played by the reuse destination of abandoned historical settlements.

Reviewer 03. From the anthropological point of view, I think a little discussion about the use of cultural patrimony to revitalize communities and help the economic scenarios is necessary. To set a line or a warning not to transform the patrimony into a mediatic show to satisfy a tourist.

Authors. The authors wish to thank the reviewer for this important remark. We agree that in the synthesis of the description of the proposal and in the final conclusions this aspect was not appropriately discussed. Thus, we integrated the last part of the section dedicated to “Discussion on the valorization principles for the reuse design of the fortress” (now turn into the 5^th paragraph) with a new paragraph. The text is here reported:

“Although these kinds of sport happenings could give the idea of an inappropriate use of the heritage, the combination between sport activities and cultural tourism can match the requirements for a valorization plan of the archaeological site. For this work, some striking images have been chosen to incisively represent a specific idea of use of the fortified structures still present. Such events are concentrated in few appointments throughout the year, and only few experts have the ability, and consequently can obtain permission, to climb medieval towers to the top. The risk, for such sportive events, is that the historical building remains a sort of pleasant background in pictures and videos used by media creators. Thus, it should be remarked that one of the goals of this sport category is to introduce younger people to mountain climbing activities. Among the various categories available for participants, the one reserved for younger athletes is among the largest. Children and teenagers, supported by parents and older friends, can become familiar with the sport, while also experimenting with play while testing their limits. Beyond the recreational and sporting component, in a setting like the Vogogna fortress, young people can be educated about heritage, to gain insight into a lost medieval world, and to experience firsthand the physical substance of its structures. In other words, these activities teach healthy living and the discovery of heritage, with the hope of developing an awareness of the historical values to which a given community belongs, and to see a growing respect and desire to protect and care for such places”.

Reviewer 03. Figures: love it, very good ones.

Authors. We thank you for your enthusiasm regarding our graphic and pictures layouts.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General Comments

The manuscript “A multidisciplinary approach for the conservation design of the medieval fortress of Vogogna. From the analysis to the valorization of the archaeological site” presents a coherent and complete study concerning the analysis, conservation, and valorization of a medieval archaeological site. The paper integrates historical research, advanced survey methods, and design proposals for reuse. The topic is relevant for the field of architectural and archaeological heritage, and the approach is consistent with current conservation practices. The structure is clear and the objectives are well defined, although the text could be slightly more concise in some sections. Overall, the work fits within the scope of the journal and can be accepted after minor editorial adjustments.

Specific Comments

The introduction clearly defines the context and the reasons behind the research, highlighting the collaboration between the local administration and the university. The methodology is described in sufficient detail, combining UAV photogrammetry and terrestrial laser scanning; however, the section could benefit from a shorter and more direct explanation of the workflow to avoid redundancy.

The historical and stratigraphic analysis is one of the most solid parts of the paper and provides a useful reconstruction of the fortress’s evolution. Figures and diagrams effectively support the text, although the captions could be standardized and shortened for readability.

The conservation analysis is methodologically sound and follows recognized guidelines. The proposed measures are realistic, but the description could be summarized by focusing on the main technical actions rather than their step-by-step listing.

The section on reuse and valorization offers interesting reflections but tends to expand excessively on theoretical comparisons. It would be preferable to limit the number of references to other European cases and concentrate more on the specific implications for Vogogna. The reuse proposal itself is coherent and balanced, though the inclusion of recreational functions such as climbing activities could be better justified in relation to the conservation goals.

The conclusion effectively summarizes the main outcomes of the study, but it could underline more clearly the contribution of the research in methodological terms rather than emphasizing its local relevance.

Suggestion

Minor editorial corrections are recommended, mainly to improve fluency and consistency. Some expressions could be revised (for instance, replacing “misused site” with “underused site” and avoiding repetitive use of “valorization”).

The text would benefit from a moderate reduction in length, especially in the methodological and theoretical sections, which occasionally include unnecessary repetitions. It may also be helpful to add a short statement in the conclusion about how the proposed workflow can be applied to similar heritage contexts.

With these small revisions, the manuscript would reach a good level of clarity and conciseness suitable for publication.

Author Response

Reviewer 04. The introduction clearly defines the context and the reasons behind the research, highlighting the collaboration between the local administration and the university. The methodology is described in sufficient detail, combining UAV photogrammetry and terrestrial laser scanning; however, the section could benefit from a shorter and more direct explanation of the workflow to avoid redundancy.

Authors. The authors are grateful for the indication and tried to rearrange the introduction. The following version is more concise and replaced the previous one.

This study took origin from the invitation received from the members of the city council of Vogogna, a town of about 1687 inhabitants, to arrange an academic workshop in its historical center. The municipality was looking for a collaboration with the university to develop the analysis of the locally built heritage, with the request to verify the possible development of a cultural path through the main points of interest offered by the context. Vogogna is a small town placed in Ossola Valley (Figure 1), a mountainous district of North Italy, in Piedmont region [1]. The historical center includes a broad medieval settlement composed of multi-story houses, noble palaces, churches, porticoed streets and defensive structures. The town was an important administrative center of the Ossola Valley in the past, but nowadays it has undergone a serious economic crisis, diffused in this area of Piedmont [2]. The changes in the main productive activities of the region, like metallurgical industry and the progressive abandonment of traditional trade linked to the rock quarries, produced a negative economic impact in the area. Among the various solutions promoted by local authorities, the empowerment of cultural services appeared as a promising asset for future job opportunities. Thus, the Municipality of Vogogna subscribed to a convention with the School of Architecture, Urban Planning, Construction Engineering of Politecnico di Milano, specifically with the Preservation Studio course coordinated by the authors, to support the analysis of the architectural heritage characterizing its historical center and the hamlets diffused on the surrounding mountains.

The aim of the convention is to develop historical analyses, advanced geometrical surveys, investigation tests and conservation designs on some selected historical buildings of Vogogna. The request also concerned the ruins of the medieval fortress near the city center, built on a promontory of the mountain that rises behind the town. The municipality gave the opportunity to the course participants to access some public buildings and promoted the involvement of some private owners in the initiative to open some parts of their property to the students. The aim of the Preservation Studio is to offer training in setting up and finalizing a conservation design [3]. The students, divided in teams and coordinated by the teaching staff, experienced the common activities requested by the Italian Cultural Heritage Code [4] for achieving an in depth knowledge of the historical buildings and develop the various steps of the conservation process: analysis of the urban context, the environmental scenario, the architectural features of the assigned buildings, the constructive techniques, defining the strategy for preserving the architectural heritage and for introducing new functions. The final goal of the studio was the setting of a valorization strategy for promoting the historical relevance of the analyzed building and its significance respect to the local community [5].

In Vogogna, a general idea of enhancement was indicated by the mayor, involved since 2020 with the regional councilor in the request for public fundings to the Ministry of Culture in Rome, for a set of interventions on different buildings of the city center. His public declarations indicated a plan for reinforcing the touristic role of the town in the Ossola Valley, by the restoration of some public properties, a coordinated activity among new touristic services, the implementation of the local museum housed in the 14^th century castle and the connection with different recreational paths offered by the natural park surrounding the town: the Val Grande park, characterized by the largest wilderness area in Italy [6]. The presence of a relevant historical center and the cultural landscape offered by the protected natural area became the main assets for revitalizing the local economy.

An important part of the budget obtained by the Ministry of Culture was committed for the conservation design of the fortress of Vogogna, a military structure characterized by a tall square tower, belonging to a larger system of watchtowers, realized to protect the Ossola Valley from the invasions coming from the neighboring Swiss cantons [7]. The ruins are immersed in the forest that grows along the slopes of the mountain overlooking the city and represent one of the first steps of an archaeological tour that from Vogogna, passing through the ancient mountain hamlet of Genestredo, leads to the fortress and continue to other areas of the Val Grande Park. This work presents the results matured by a multi-disciplinary study campaign addressed to the analysis of the state of conservation of the fortress of Vogogna and the evaluation of the future reuse of its structures.

 

Reviewer 04. The historical and stratigraphic analysis is one of the most solid parts of the paper and provides a useful reconstruction of the fortress’s evolution. Figures and diagrams effectively support the text, although the captions could be standardized and shortened for readability.

Authors. The authors are grateful for this suggestion. Some of the captions of the figures contained in that section were rearranged.

 

Reviewer 04. The conservation analysis is methodologically sound and follows recognized guidelines. The proposed measures are realistic, but the description could be summarized by focusing on the main technical actions rather than their step-by-step listing.

Authors. The authors wish to thank the reviewer for this indication. Before the list of the interventions, a new paragraph was added to explain the technical actions included in the restoration design. The new paragraph is here reported:

“For its conservation, the main actions can be divided into three phases: cleaning, sealing and protection. The cleaning phase is intended as mechanical actions on common stone surfaces (not artistically workout), and by chemical solutions to remove the deposits through dedicated compress. The invasive vegetation must be removed through a combination of biocide products and mechanical cut and removal of the dead roots. For some stone typologies, like sandstones, scaling and cracks require repairing based on reinforcing mixtures (for example, ethyl-silicate) to be applied on the surface for being absorbed into the material. This solution will also guarantee protection from water. Some limited substitutions of the stone materials, due to deep cracks, must be considered: the scuci-cuci technique guarantees tailored made solution for reinforcing the structural components of the walls. These structures present a general lack of mortar joints; thus, a repointing caried out with lime-based mortar are included in the restoration measures”.

 

Reviewer 04. The section on reuse and valorization offers interesting reflections but tends to expand excessively on theoretical comparisons. It would be preferable to limit the number of references to other European cases and concentrate more on the specific implications for Vogogna. The reuse proposal itself is coherent and balanced, though the inclusion of recreational functions such as climbing activities could be better justified in relation to the conservation goals.

Authors. The authors appreciate the remarkable observation of the contents reported in this last section of the work. Other reviewers also observed that the discussion could better focus on the conservation implications of the proposed activities for the reuse. This paragraph was then integrated by a new final part, issued to clarify the impact that the combination of sport and cultural tourism can have on the preservation of the ruined fortress.

 

Reviewer 04. The conclusion effectively summarizes the main outcomes of the study, but it could underline more clearly the contribution of the research in methodological terms rather than emphasizing its local relevance.

Authors. The authors are grateful for this suggestion. We implemented the conclusions by adding a paragraph where the contribution of the research is clarified. The text is reported in a further point.

 

Suggestion

Reviewer 04. Minor editorial corrections are recommended, mainly to improve fluency and consistency. Some expressions could be revised (for instance, replacing “misused site” with “underused site” and avoiding repetitive use of “valorization”).

Authors. The authors made a general review of the language of the text and included also your suggestions. We wish to thank the reviewer for the reliable effort for improving the quality of the language.

 

Reviewer 04. The text would benefit from a moderate reduction in length, especially in the methodological and theoretical sections, which occasionally include unnecessary repetitions. It may also be helpful to add a short statement in the conclusion about how the proposed workflow can be applied to similar heritage contexts.

Authors. The authors wish to thank the reviewer for these suggestions. The text was rearrange in some sections, trying to eliminate unnecessary repeated contents. The conclusions where integrated by a short paragraph to match your last indication. This is the added part:

“The proposed workflow remarks the relationship between local communities and cultural assets. The case study, a ruined fortress, can activate very specific knowledge paths through the conservation process described in this work. The study included a picture of the town, its economic and social conditions, to identify the potentialities represented by the historical center and the peculiar cultural landscape here present. Among the various historical buildings, the fortress could provide a strategic solution for reviving social and cultural activities in this area. The model here proposed was set on the peculiar characteristics of Vogogna and its archaeological settlement, deeply connected to the natural environment, but the applied methodology represents a reliable approach that could be used for other underused sites. Moreover, the proposed advanced survey provides an innovative digital tool that can be implemented for future preventive planned conservation design, to support the management of the archaeological settlement and its constant care.”  

 

Reviewer 04. With these small revisions, the manuscript would reach a good level of clarity and conciseness suitable for publication.

Authors. The authors are grateful for the given indications. We tried to follow some suggestions to clarify the contents and improve the text. Your effort in detailing the different aspects to consider in the correction was precious support.