Talk:CONSHA

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?

DavidAcland 14:46, 14 August 2008 (CEST)

I think we could use CTNARE. But we all know it is already too heavily used for so many things. This allows us to be more specific and we already have instances where we would like to use a construction like this.

jens 13:17, 19 August 2008 (CEST)

No problem with that, it is good for the protocol that this option was taken under consideration I will follow the proposed idea

Submitted to Hydro register manager Date

Submitted to Nav register manager Date