Talk:GMDSSA - Revision history

Jens at 08:58, 25 February 2014

2014-02-25T08:58:31Z

Rmm at 10:09, 21 February 2014

2014-02-21T10:09:44Z

Rmm at 10:09, 21 February 2014

2014-02-21T10:09:28Z

New page

Drafted by Northern before SNPWG 8

Jens 13.11.2007 can be GMDSS areas also temporarily established or in force? If not, PEREND, PERSAT can be removed from Set A.

11 Feb 08 Good thought; deleted.

DA 11 Feb 08 WEG 13 Feb 08 Agreed

[[User:DavidAcland|DavidAcland]] 16:55, 13 August 2008 (CEST)

Just a camel case thing. Is this the correct way to handle acronyms like GMDSS in the camel case line? Two other ways come to mind 1) "gMDSS" and 2) spell out the whole thing "globalMaritimeDistress ... etc".

[[User:Jens|jens]] 13:18, 14 August 2008 (CEST)

Thinking this should be answered by Berry's team. They should know the options we have. I assume some fix rules are defined.

[[User:DavidAcland|DavidAcland]] 15:23, 14 August 2008 (CEST)

Good advice. Spoken to Barry and not all good news but we now have some rules. He says S-100 says:

1. Spell out all acronyms fully. (but I am not sure it says this bit)

2. First letter of camel case for features - upper case.

3. First letter of camel case for attributes - lower case.

2 and 3 follow a convention I have seen somewhere before; possibly for UML.

Discussed with Mal and then tried to follow these rules. Rule 1 was too silly and made camel cases too long, less human understandable and so I reject it.

My new rule 1 is to use the acronym but convert to lower case in general and follow rules 2 and 3. So catrco becomes categoryOfDgpsMessagesGlonass. This was the silliest when fully spelt out. This is unique and fully human understandable and so follows the S-100 guidline.

Jens, Can you find somewhere in your Product Specification for this rule? Is that the right place? I have amended the wiki in line with this. Better check the items you have already agreed. I also added dgps to IntegrityMonitoring to fit the pattern of the other attributes.

[[User:Jens|jens]] 13:21, 19 August 2008 (CEST)
done, set proposal accordingly

[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 10:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC): Alain writes in email that GMDSSA should be reviewed, because the geometries of areas A1-A4 are not easy to define.

Submitted to Hydro register manager Date

Submitted to Nav register manager Date

Jens at 11:21, 19 August 2008

2008-08-19T11:21:55Z

New page

Drafted by Northern before SNPWG 8

Jens 13.11.2007 can be GMDSS areas also temporarily established or in force? If not, PEREND, PERSAT can be removed from Set A.

11 Feb 08 Good thought; deleted.

DA 11 Feb 08 WEG 13 Feb 08 Agreed

[[User:DavidAcland|DavidAcland]] 16:55, 13 August 2008 (CEST)

Just a camel case thing. Is this the correct way to handle acronyms like GMDSS in the camel case line? Two other ways come to mind 1) "gMDSS" and 2) spell out the whole thing "globalMaritimeDistress ... etc".

[[User:Jens|jens]] 13:18, 14 August 2008 (CEST)

Thinking this should be answered by Berry's team. They should know the options we have. I assume some fix rules are defined.

[[User:DavidAcland|DavidAcland]] 15:23, 14 August 2008 (CEST)

Good advice. Spoken to Barry and not all good news but we now have some rules. He says S-100 says:

1. Spell out all acronyms fully. (but I am not sure it says this bit)

2. First letter of camel case for features - upper case.

3. First letter of camel case for attributes - lower case.

2 and 3 follow a convention I have seen somewhere before; possibly for UML.

Discussed with Mal and then tried to follow these rules. Rule 1 was too silly and made camel cases too long, less human understandable and so I reject it.

My new rule 1 is to use the acronym but convert to lower case in general and follow rules 2 and 3. So catrco becomes categoryOfDgpsMessagesGlonass. This was the silliest when fully spelt out. This is unique and fully human understandable and so follows the S-100 guidline.

Jens, Can you find somewhere in your Product Specification for this rule? Is that the right place? I have amended the wiki in line with this. Better check the items you have already agreed. I also added dgps to IntegrityMonitoring to fit the pattern of the other attributes.

[[User:Jens|jens]] 13:21, 19 August 2008 (CEST)
done, set proposal accordingly

Submitted to Hydro register manager Date

Submitted to Nav register manager Date

Jens at 11:18, 14 August 2008

2008-08-14T11:18:32Z

New page

Jens: New page: Drafted by Northern before SNPWG 8 Jens 13.11.2007 can be GMDSS areas also temporarily established or in force? If not, PEREND, PERSAT can be removed from Set A. 11 Feb 08 Good thou...

2008-08-06T17:38:42Z

New page: Drafted by Northern before SNPWG 8 Jens 13.11.2007 can be GMDSS areas also temporarily established or in force? If not, PEREND, PERSAT can be removed from Set A. 11 Feb 08 Good thou...

New page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:58, 25 February 2014
Line 37:		Line 37:

	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 10:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC): Alain writes in email that GMDSSA should be reviewed, because the geometries of areas A1-A4 are not easy to define.		[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 10:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC): Alain writes in email that GMDSSA should be reviewed, because the geometries of areas A1-A4 are not easy to define.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 08:58, 25 February 2014 (UTC) Indeed, that is a challenge. I'll ask Alain and ask for a suggestion.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:09, 21 February 2014
Line 37:		Line 37:

	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 10:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC): Alain writes in email that GMDSSA should be reviewed, because the geometries of areas A1-A4 are not easy to define.		[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 10:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC): Alain writes in email that GMDSSA should be reviewed, because the geometries of areas A1-A4 are not easy to define.
−
−	~~Submitted to Hydro register manager Date~~
−
−	~~Submitted to Nav register manager Date~~