Difference between revisions of "Talk:S-126"
(Created page with "We need to open a serious discussion about what we envision the S126 (physical environment) to be used for. If we can't visualize uses for it, we won't be able to model it eff...") |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
*to search for specific feature types; ie: rocky areas, areas with lots of bends in waterway, features above specific heights, places to have a picnic, etc. | *to search for specific feature types; ie: rocky areas, areas with lots of bends in waterway, features above specific heights, places to have a picnic, etc. | ||
*keep in mind users of the data and different way the data could be used: kayakers, small leisure crafts, outreach, tourism, etc | *keep in mind users of the data and different way the data could be used: kayakers, small leisure crafts, outreach, tourism, etc | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[User:Jens|jens]] ([[User talk:Jens|talk]]) 21:02, 23 August 2017 (CEST) | ||
| + | I thought it was done during the scope discussion. The first intention is to model the set of information which is currently provided in pubs. That is actually captured in the test data sample. We should avoid to extent this set of information because of that this set is the only one for which NIPWG has the HSSC endorsement. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In the beginning, we decided to make the data model as simple as possible. But in consideration of Briana's intention to use this information for other purposes as well, it could be benficial to make it more specific. | ||
Revision as of 21:02, 23 August 2017
We need to open a serious discussion about what we envision the S126 (physical environment) to be used for. If we can't visualize uses for it, we won't be able to model it effectively.
- voice navigation/readers
- clarification on ambiguous or missing detail from a chart image (need examples)
- to search for specific feature types; ie: rocky areas, areas with lots of bends in waterway, features above specific heights, places to have a picnic, etc.
- keep in mind users of the data and different way the data could be used: kayakers, small leisure crafts, outreach, tourism, etc
jens (talk) 21:02, 23 August 2017 (CEST) I thought it was done during the scope discussion. The first intention is to model the set of information which is currently provided in pubs. That is actually captured in the test data sample. We should avoid to extent this set of information because of that this set is the only one for which NIPWG has the HSSC endorsement.
In the beginning, we decided to make the data model as simple as possible. But in consideration of Briana's intention to use this information for other purposes as well, it could be benficial to make it more specific.