Difference between revisions of "Talk:CONSHA"
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
I see the point, but why we need to establish a new object if instead the Caution Area CTNARE will fit our requirements too. We simple have to add the attribute, which is perfect, to CTNARE. | I see the point, but why we need to establish a new object if instead the Caution Area CTNARE will fit our requirements too. We simple have to add the attribute, which is perfect, to CTNARE. | ||
What do think? | What do think? | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[User:Jens|jens]] 13:22, 14 August 2008 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Again. I didn't see the distinction to CTNARE. What is the difference between those two objects? | ||
| + | |||
Revision as of 11:22, 14 August 2008
Drafted by Western before SNPWG 6
agreed SNPWG8
05.11.07 Jens Although knowing that we have had strong discussions in the past I would like to recommend to delete the last sentence which might cause misunderstandings and to point the first sentence more to the hazards caused by shipping.
14.12. Jens A bit cleverer I would propose to use CTNARE (Caution area) as an existing object and add catsha when necessary
11.01. Jens M-3 work
DavidAcland 13:00, 13 August 2008 (CEST)
Tidied and simplified definition.
Jens, I have put the second sentence back in because we use "hazard", which could be quite a wide problem, in a fairly carefully calibrated way and I have not seen this definition published anywhere else.
jens 14:27, 13 August 2008 (CEST) I see the point, but why we need to establish a new object if instead the Caution Area CTNARE will fit our requirements too. We simple have to add the attribute, which is perfect, to CTNARE. What do think?
jens 13:22, 14 August 2008 (CEST)
Again. I didn't see the distinction to CTNARE. What is the difference between those two objects?
Submitted to Hydro register manager Date
Submitted to Nav register manager Date