Difference between revisions of "Talk:CATREA"
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 01:47, 4 May 2011 (UTC): TSMAD will probably ask for justification, and for "coral sanctuary" the question may be "why not use 4 - nature reserve or 22 - ecological reserve"? | [[User:Rmm|raphael]] 01:47, 4 May 2011 (UTC): TSMAD will probably ask for justification, and for "coral sanctuary" the question may be "why not use 4 - nature reserve or 22 - ecological reserve"? | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[User:Rmm|raphael]] 20:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC): More information via Eivind below: | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | My recollection is that ecological reserve (value 23) was not specific enough for coral reserve, and therefore a new value has been proposed. But if we don’t think it matters for ENCs, and we’ll just use this for MPAs, then this is not the place to propose this, it should rather go into the registry, and we’ll use it there for the MPA feature catalogue. | ||
Revision as of 20:20, 4 May 2011
Cwinn72 18:26, 25 February 2009 (CET)
that cause due to deletion of catmpa
jens 13:33, 13 May 2009 (CEST)
ESSA and PSSA have been added to S57 by Suppl. 2 published may 2009
coral sanctuary is still open
DavidAcland 11:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
ESSA and PSSA removed in line with Jens' post above.
Coral sanctuary needs to be part of a general proposal of additions and ammendments from SNPWG to TSMAD for the S-101 feature catalogue.
raphael 01:47, 4 May 2011 (UTC): TSMAD will probably ask for justification, and for "coral sanctuary" the question may be "why not use 4 - nature reserve or 22 - ecological reserve"?
raphael 20:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC): More information via Eivind below:
My recollection is that ecological reserve (value 23) was not specific enough for coral reserve, and therefore a new value has been proposed. But if we don’t think it matters for ENCs, and we’ll just use this for MPAs, then this is not the place to propose this, it should rather go into the registry, and we’ll use it there for the MPA feature catalogue.