Difference between revisions of "Talk:WKHRDY"
m |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
[[User:Rmm|raphael]] 20:12, 1 September 2009 (UTC): Propose changing cardinality of sub-attributes [[TIMSTW]] and [[TIMENW]] to 1..* to handle this. | [[User:Rmm|raphael]] 20:12, 1 September 2009 (UTC): Propose changing cardinality of sub-attributes [[TIMSTW]] and [[TIMENW]] to 1..* to handle this. | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[User:Rmm|raphael]] 20:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC): Also, addition of the following constraint to the specification for [[WKHRDY]]: | ||
| + | |||
| + | Other | ||
| + | |||
| + | Pair-wise correspondence between timstw and timenw is required. For each timstw/timenw pair, timstw must precede timenw. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | And the following definition of "pair-wise" correspondence, in, say, the product specification: | ||
| + | |||
| + | Pair-wise correspondence | ||
| + | |||
| + | Let a1…am be the sequence of values of attribute A of an instance of object class O and b1...bn the sequence of values of attribute B of the same instance, each in the same order that the values occur in the data set. (Null values are permitted.) Attributes A and B have pair-wise correspondence when: (i) m = n; (ii) the encoding guide or product specification defines a relationship, or assigns special significance, for pairs (ai, bj) if and only if i = j. Informally, the attributes are pair-wise correspondent if and only each value is associated with its opposite number for the other attribute. For example, each value of attribute “day-of-the-week” may be associated with a value of attribute “office-hours”, signifying that the office in question is open during those hours on that day of the week. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | This may seem complicated, but the S-57 encoding guide tries to achieve a similar goal with NATQUA/NATSUR in clause 7.1 of Appendix B.1. If list types (e.g., "1,2,4") are not allowed, the proposed solution or an alternative is needed. | ||
Revision as of 20:24, 1 September 2009
SNPWG 8 agreed
jens 19:48, 14 February 2009 (CET)
added a comment to clarify the multi working time option
raphael 20:12, 1 September 2009 (UTC): Propose changing cardinality of sub-attributes TIMSTW and TIMENW to 1..* to handle this.
raphael 20:24, 1 September 2009 (UTC): Also, addition of the following constraint to the specification for WKHRDY:
Other
Pair-wise correspondence between timstw and timenw is required. For each timstw/timenw pair, timstw must precede timenw.
And the following definition of "pair-wise" correspondence, in, say, the product specification:
Pair-wise correspondence
Let a1…am be the sequence of values of attribute A of an instance of object class O and b1...bn the sequence of values of attribute B of the same instance, each in the same order that the values occur in the data set. (Null values are permitted.) Attributes A and B have pair-wise correspondence when: (i) m = n; (ii) the encoding guide or product specification defines a relationship, or assigns special significance, for pairs (ai, bj) if and only if i = j. Informally, the attributes are pair-wise correspondent if and only each value is associated with its opposite number for the other attribute. For example, each value of attribute “day-of-the-week” may be associated with a value of attribute “office-hours”, signifying that the office in question is open during those hours on that day of the week.
This may seem complicated, but the S-57 encoding guide tries to achieve a similar goal with NATQUA/NATSUR in clause 7.1 of Appendix B.1. If list types (e.g., "1,2,4") are not allowed, the proposed solution or an alternative is needed.