Difference between revisions of "Talk:LITNUM"
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 02:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC): How are the separate components given by the sub-attributes expected to be used? | [[User:Rmm|raphael]] 02:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC): How are the separate components given by the sub-attributes expected to be used? | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[User:Jens|jens]] 08:07, 29 November 2010 (UTC) good point Raphael. I assume that is because the UKHO has uses separate data fields to built their international light number. But I'm not 100% sure that that is correct. We should wait for David to uncover the mystery. | ||
Revision as of 08:07, 29 November 2010
jens 11:24, 8 November 2010 (UTC) that is another open topic.
Where to put the national number?
Is that correct to separate the number into 3 pieces? Wouldn't be the letter code and one number (real with 4 decimal) not sufficient?
jens 09:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC) next point. Having sector lights we should assign the light number to the master (in S57 term) perhaps the building where the light is located. The different light sectors itself are the slaves.
jens 17:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC) That causes necessarily the question whether the light number is a candidate to become an associated information object and we have to reconstruct the information.
raphael 02:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC): How are the separate components given by the sub-attributes expected to be used?
jens 08:07, 29 November 2010 (UTC) good point Raphael. I assume that is because the UKHO has uses separate data fields to built their international light number. But I'm not 100% sure that that is correct. We should wait for David to uncover the mystery.