Talk:SNPWG2
Scope
xxxxx
Product Specifications
General
(general material in product specifications)
Waterways
(discussions about waterways)
Pilotage
raphael 20:12, 2 August 2009 (CEST): The draft specification we prepared uses the term "Pilotage intormation" instead of "Pilot Service information" in several places. "Pilot Service" was the term picked in the breakout group during SNPWG10. But there is a "pilot service" object defined in the SNPWG model and we felt that using the same term in the name of a product specification generates confusion. Comments are invited - for, against, or with alternatives.
Marine Protected areas
(Mainly if not solely, S-122)
UML Models
Product Specification Scope
xxxx
Non Geospatial Scope
xxxx
NIPWG Application Schema
xxxx
Waterways
xxxx
Recommended Tracks package
xxxx
Pilotage
xxxx
Marine Protected Areas
Following an e-mail discussion between Jens, Eivind, and me, the plan is to remove Wrecks and Obstruction features from the S-122 application schema, based on the following reasoning:
- The physical object (wreck/obstruction) is not needed to give an accurate representation of the protected area. We can represent the protected area without the wrecks and obstructions features.
- The data should be as frugal as possible to reduce the maintenance cost as well as the development cost.
- S-101 says the wreck itself should be encoded (in addition to a restricted area), but S-122 does not have to do the same.
- The ENC will provide the charted background anyway and if MPA provides the same information again or with slight modification, it might cause interoperability issues at the end.
Overlapping/Mixed Datasets
(add your comments on this topic in this section, following previous comments if any)