Difference between revisions of "Talk:AUTORI"
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
[[User:Jens|jens]] 12:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC) | [[User:Jens|jens]] 12:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
| − | [[NTCTIM]] in this context should be used if reports have to be given which are not covered under [[SHPREP]], e.g. 96 hrs pre-notice to the harbour authority. Until a better argument I prefer to retain [[ | + | [[NTCTIM]] in this context should be used if reports have to be given which are not covered under [[SHPREP]], e.g. 96 hrs pre-notice to the harbour authority. Until a better argument I prefer to retain [[NTCTIM]] here. [[User:Jens|jens]] 09:47, 8 August 2010 (UTC) The ProdSpec should specify a conditional status fro [[NTCTIM]] here. It should be only used if [[SHPREP]] is not being used. |
Revision as of 09:47, 8 August 2010
Drafted and agreed by SNPWG8
14.11.07 Jens added various inf obj.
SNPWG 9 Still open for final agreement
27.07. 08 Jens I think nonworking day is a superfluous attribute here. It is a sub-attribute of srvhrs; see there. Shall we delete from here?
29.07.08 David. I agree. Deleting nwkday from autori.
Submitted to Hydro register manager Date
Submitted to Nav register manager Date
12.08.08 Ricardo.
I didn’t quite understand why we need PEREND and PERSTA since we have DATEND and DATSTA. Is there a case of seasonal authority? I was wondering if we could just use the second pair – which seems, to me, to be the best option –, or just the first one.
jens 10:37, 13 August 2008 (CEST)
The items fit following constructions:
DATSTA/DATEND will be used when an authority will come into force/ will be closed to a specified date. Data producer will be able to insert a date and the ENC will appear/disappear the information at appropriated time.
PERSTA/PEREND will be used when an authority will be in operation only for a specified period of time; e.g. the authority of a port affected to be closed during ice season might be operate only in summer period. All other times they drink wine, watch TV, read books etc. (just kidding)
DavidAcland 10:48, 13 August 2008 (CEST)
Jens thanks for the tip.
I see we have both condet and telcom. telcom now denigrated and moved to deleted page; calnam CALSGN COMCHA are now placed in condet. Deleting telcom from autori.
jens 10:53, 13 August 2008 (CEST)
I agree. Looks fine to me now.
Looks good to me - Tom Loeper 12 March 09.
jens 11:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC) based on discussions at MPAARE the object type was changed from feature to information
DavidAcland 13:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
NTCTIM looks redundant to me. Authorities do not really have a "Notice". Reports or Requests to them do and we have that covered as an attribute of SHPREP. Propose delete from AUTORI.
jens 12:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC) NTCTIM in this context should be used if reports have to be given which are not covered under SHPREP, e.g. 96 hrs pre-notice to the harbour authority. Until a better argument I prefer to retain NTCTIM here. jens 09:47, 8 August 2010 (UTC) The ProdSpec should specify a conditional status fro NTCTIM here. It should be only used if SHPREP is not being used.