Dear Authors
Thank-you again for your revised manuscript. The referee has now seen it and asks for one correction as well as making two remarks which you should perhaps also take into account.

Correction: “I think the statement on basin width being smaller than half the Kelvin wavelength leading to bound Poincaré waves is not correct. The expression for critical basin width is in fact more complicated and depending on Coriolis parameter as well: bcrit=pi*sqrt(gh/[omega^2-f^2]) as one may derive e.g. from Eq.(8) of Hendershott & Speranza [1971] or other sources. Please revisit this statement and correct.”
Remarks:
1) “- I do not understand the distinction on tides vs tide dynamics made by the authors when rebutting my request to expand on earlier literature on the study site.”
2) “- I somewhat regret that the theoretical effort of deriving a frictional radiating condition is not taken, even though its effect is shown to be small. I personally think that adopting the idealized modelling philosophy implies that - once the model has been formulated - one should try to avoid unnecessary approximations in the mathematical solution as much as possible.”

Please do make the correction.
Regarding remark 1, the point being made by the referee was that you list (page 2, lines 11-13) many references on tides in Taiwan Strait without saying something about what is learned from those references. There should be some benefit to the paper in citing each reference.
Regarding remark 2, I think the effect of friction as represented in your manuscript is to replace “h” in (6) by “h(1-iμ)” (making the same simplification as for (6) which applies to a Kelvin wave with v=0).

Additional Editor comments.
Page 5 lines 17-18. I think “if friction is considered, it contains an error of the order of μ2,” refers to the amplitude (only; not the phase).

Page 7 lines 3-4. “the high-order Poincaré modes decay from the boundary very quickly (e.g., Godin, 1965)”; this can be seen directly from large sn in (11), (12).

Page 8 line 11. “northeast” -> “northwest”?

Page 10 line 5. “northward Kelvin wave is weaker than the northward wave on average”. Do you mean “. . weaker than the southward wave . .”?

Thank-you for this revised version. I am now accepting it. There are a few places where I think the text may be changed in detail by copy-editing; you should check that the final version keeps the meaning that you intend.
Thank-you for submitting this paper to Ocean Science.
Yours sincerely
John Huthnance