Talk:INMSAT - Revision history

Jens at 17:14, 26 April 2014

2014-04-26T17:14:14Z

Jens at 17:13, 26 April 2014

2014-04-26T17:13:58Z

Rmm at 16:45, 24 April 2014

2014-04-24T16:45:52Z

Jens at 09:24, 22 April 2014

2014-04-22T09:24:05Z

Jens at 08:32, 25 February 2014

2014-02-25T08:32:47Z

Rmm at 10:06, 21 February 2014

2014-02-21T10:06:04Z

Jens at 14:25, 27 January 2014

2014-01-27T14:25:35Z

Rmm at 06:43, 16 January 2014

2014-01-16T06:43:34Z

New page

Drafted by Northern before SNPWG 8

NEG 30.01. Weg 14 Feb 08 Agreed

DA 11 Aug 08. Tweeked definition.

[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 06:43, 16 January 2014 (UTC): The current definition binds STATUS and RESTRN attributes, can we have some explanation on this page of when they might be used? While some STATUS values (permanent, temporary, occasional?) might sometimes be used I am having difficulty thinking of a situation when RESTRN would be used.

Also, given the size of INMARSAT ocean areas, would PICREP/GRAPHC be desirable (if someone wants to include a graphic of worldwide coverage?).

Submitted to Hydro register manager Date

Submitted to Nav register manager Date

Jens: New page: Drafted by Northern before SNPWG 8 NEG 30.01. Weg 14 Feb 08 Agreed Submitted to Hydro register manager Date Submitted to Nav register manager Date

2008-08-06T18:01:31Z

New page: Drafted by Northern before SNPWG 8 NEG 30.01. Weg 14 Feb 08 Agreed Submitted to Hydro register manager Date Submitted to Nav register manager Date

New page

Drafted by Northern before SNPWG 8

NEG 30.01. Weg 14 Feb 08 Agreed

Submitted to Hydro register manager Date

Submitted to Nav register manager Date

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:14, 26 April 2014
Line 22:		Line 22:
	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 16:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC): Either "name" or an open enumeration codelist seems OK.		[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 16:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC): Either "name" or an open enumeration codelist seems OK.

−	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 17:13, 26 April 2014 (UTC) okay, let's resume with name. It looks like the simplest solution and the simplest solution if mostly the best :)	+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 17:13, 26 April 2014 (UTC) okay, let's resume with "name". It looks like the simplest solution and the simplest solution if mostly the best :)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:13, 26 April 2014
Line 21:		Line 21:

	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 16:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC): Either "name" or an open enumeration codelist seems OK.		[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 16:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC): Either "name" or an open enumeration codelist seems OK.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 17:13, 26 April 2014 (UTC) okay, let's resume with name. It looks like the simplest solution and the simplest solution if mostly the best :)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:45, 24 April 2014
Line 19:		Line 19:

	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 09:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Should we replace "name" by an open attribute (Inmarsat ID)which contains the different Inmarsat I-3 and I-4 identifiers? Open, because of nowbody knows if Inmarsat intends to increase or decrease the numbers of satellites and services.		[[User:Jens\|jens]] 09:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Should we replace "name" by an open attribute (Inmarsat ID)which contains the different Inmarsat I-3 and I-4 identifiers? Open, because of nowbody knows if Inmarsat intends to increase or decrease the numbers of satellites and services.
		+
		+	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 16:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC): Either "name" or an open enumeration codelist seems OK.

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:24, 22 April 2014
Line 17:		Line 17:

	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 08:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC) I see you point. I think the current feature is fine. It doesn't matter if we may get an overlap of different Inmarsat regions. It is obvious that Inmarsat I-3 areas overlap and that I-4 areas overlap. In the case that two Inmarsat constellations apply for an area, we might get an overlap of 4 areas. That shouldn't be a problem.		[[User:Jens\|jens]] 08:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC) I see you point. I think the current feature is fine. It doesn't matter if we may get an overlap of different Inmarsat regions. It is obvious that Inmarsat I-3 areas overlap and that I-4 areas overlap. In the case that two Inmarsat constellations apply for an area, we might get an overlap of 4 areas. That shouldn't be a problem.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 09:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Should we replace "name" by an open attribute (Inmarsat ID)which contains the different Inmarsat I-3 and I-4 identifiers? Open, because of nowbody knows if Inmarsat intends to increase or decrease the numbers of satellites and services.

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:32, 25 February 2014
Line 15:		Line 15:

	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 10:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC): Alain writes (email, January 31 2014) that this feature should be reviewed because there are currently two Inmarsat constellations. Regions covered by the 4 satellites "I-3" (AOR-E, AOR-W, POR, and IOR) or the 3 satellites "I-4" (EMEA, Americas, and Asia-Pacific) are different.		[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 10:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC): Alain writes (email, January 31 2014) that this feature should be reviewed because there are currently two Inmarsat constellations. Regions covered by the 4 satellites "I-3" (AOR-E, AOR-W, POR, and IOR) or the 3 satellites "I-4" (EMEA, Americas, and Asia-Pacific) are different.
		+
		+	[[User:Jens\|jens]] 08:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC) I see you point. I think the current feature is fine. It doesn't matter if we may get an overlap of different Inmarsat regions. It is obvious that Inmarsat I-3 areas overlap and that I-4 areas overlap. In the case that two Inmarsat constellations apply for an area, we might get an overlap of 4 areas. That shouldn't be a problem.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:06, 21 February 2014
Line 13:		Line 13:

	I'm not sure if PICREP/GRAPHC should be provided. I'm tempted to say "no, it isn't".		I'm not sure if PICREP/GRAPHC should be provided. I'm tempted to say "no, it isn't".
		+
		+	[[User:Rmm\|raphael]] 10:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC): Alain writes (email, January 31 2014) that this feature should be reviewed because there are currently two Inmarsat constellations. Regions covered by the 4 satellites "I-3" (AOR-E, AOR-W, POR, and IOR) or the 3 satellites "I-4" (EMEA, Americas, and Asia-Pacific) are different.

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 Also, given the size of INMARSAT ocean areas, would PICREP/GRAPHC be desirable (if someone wants to include a graphic of worldwide coverage?).
-Submitted to Hydro register manager	Date
+[[User:Jens|jens]] 14:25, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
-Submitted  to Nav register manager	Date
+I'm not sure if PICREP/GRAPHC should be provided. I'm tempted to say "no, it isn't".