Talk:CATRGY - Revision history

Jens at 07:03, 11 August 2010

2010-08-11T07:03:48Z

Rmm at 05:42, 11 August 2010

2010-08-11T05:42:55Z

New page

[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 06:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC) :

A new attribute Category of Registry is proposed. This attribute is intended to allow distinguishing between vessels registered under the same national flag as the port etc., to which some information is attached, and vessels registered under a foreign flag. The third category was added to cover all the possibilities - consideration of the need for it will be appreciated.

[[User:Jens|jens]] 05:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I haven't had such limitations in the focus; the proposal makes sense. Often to be seen were special regulations apply if the vessel flies a foreign flag.

[[User:Jens|jens]] 16:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Should be added by a further entry describing sub-standard flags. I will check the proper term tomorrow at office.

[[User:Jens|jens]] 05:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I checked the NP entries and it looks like that they refer rather sub-standard vessels and/or vessels with lack of proper amended charts and equipment. Both would be on the wrong place here.

[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 08:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC): "Remarks" should be either "No remarks" or the statement about binding to CHALIM.

[[User:Jens|jens]] 13:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC) ok, done.

[[User:Jens|jens]] 12:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)replaced [[CHALIM]] by [[APPLIC]]

[[User:DavidAcland|DavidAcland]] 14:06, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

CATREG = 3 looks odd to me. From time to time vessels change registries but I believe the can only have one registration at one time. However i can imagine that CATREG = 3 was designed to mean that the regulation applied to "both domestic and foreign vessels". If this is the case, let me know and I will tidy up the definition to say this.

[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 05:42, 11 August 2010 (UTC): I cannot find an authoritative answer to the question of whether vessels can have more than one registration, or remember why I thought this might be so. Jens, is there something special about registration in Germany, in connection with insurance perhaps?

The absence of this attribute would implicitly indicate that the regulation applies to both domestic and foreign vessels. Dropping value 3 may be simplest.

Jens at 12:21, 7 August 2010

2010-08-07T12:21:14Z

Jens at 13:38, 15 January 2010

2010-01-15T13:38:09Z

Rmm at 08:37, 15 January 2010

2010-01-15T08:37:54Z

Jens at 05:31, 15 September 2009

2009-09-15T05:31:46Z

Jens at 16:35, 14 September 2009

2009-09-14T16:35:25Z

Jens: New page: raphael 06:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC) : A new attribute Category of Registry is proposed. This attribute is intended to allow distinguishing between vessels registered under th...

2009-08-24T05:00:30Z

New page: raphael 06:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC) : A new attribute Category of Registry is proposed. This attribute is intended to allow distinguishing between vessels registered under th...

New page

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:03, 11 August 2010
Line 28:		Line 28:

	The absence of this attribute would implicitly indicate that the regulation applies to both domestic and foreign vessels. Dropping value 3 may be simplest.		The absence of this attribute would implicitly indicate that the regulation applies to both domestic and foreign vessels. Dropping value 3 may be simplest.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 07:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)<br> That is correct. A vessel can be registered in two registers. That will be the case if a charterer requested a different flag for a ship registered originally in Germany and chartered under Bare Boat Charters (wrong English, I assume)
		+	<br> The ship will remain in German register and is registered at the foreign register for a specified period of time (usually 1-2 years). The permission of flying a foreign flag must be renewed latest after 2 years time.
		+	<br>That is not only in Germany the case. My colleagues said that is internationally common procedure.

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:21, 7 August 2010
Line 18:		Line 18:

	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 13:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC) ok, done.		[[User:Jens\|jens]] 13:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC) ok, done.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 12:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)replaced [[CHALIM]] by [[APPLIC]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:38, 15 January 2010
Line 16:		Line 16:

	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 08:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC): "Remarks" should be either "No remarks" or the statement about binding to CHALIM.		[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 08:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC): "Remarks" should be either "No remarks" or the statement about binding to CHALIM.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 13:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC) ok, done.

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:37, 15 January 2010
Line 14:		Line 14:

	I checked the NP entries and it looks like that they refer rather sub-standard vessels and/or vessels with lack of proper amended charts and equipment. Both would be on the wrong place here.		I checked the NP entries and it looks like that they refer rather sub-standard vessels and/or vessels with lack of proper amended charts and equipment. Both would be on the wrong place here.
		+
		+	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 08:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC): "Remarks" should be either "No remarks" or the statement about binding to CHALIM.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:31, 15 September 2009
Line 10:		Line 10:

	Should be added by a further entry describing sub-standard flags. I will check the proper term tomorrow at office.		Should be added by a further entry describing sub-standard flags. I will check the proper term tomorrow at office.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 05:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	I checked the NP entries and it looks like that they refer rather sub-standard vessels and/or vessels with lack of proper amended charts and equipment. Both would be on the wrong place here.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:35, 14 September 2009
Line 6:		Line 6:

	I haven't had such limitations in the focus; the proposal makes sense. Often to be seen were special regulations apply if the vessel flies a foreign flag.		I haven't had such limitations in the focus; the proposal makes sense. Often to be seen were special regulations apply if the vessel flies a foreign flag.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 16:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	Should be added by a further entry describing sub-standard flags. I will check the proper term tomorrow at office.