The new Draft S-58 Edition 6.0.0 documents

Signe Paevere Subject: FW: Documents for your approval Attachments: S-58 Draft Edt 6 0 0 Comment Form_Estonia 09092016.docx ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Dana Kuznetsova Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 2:07 PM To: Signe Paevere <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Documents for your approval ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Dana Kuznetsova Sent: Friday, September 9, 2016 3:56 PM To: 'richard.fowle@ic‐enc.org' <richard.fowle@ic‐enc.org> Cc: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; Tõnis Siilanarusk <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Documents for your approval Dear Richard, Please see my comments attached regarding the new Draft S‐58 Edition 6.0.0. Kind regards Dana Kuznetsova Senior Cartography Specialist Estonian Maritime Administration e‐mail: [email protected] Phone:+372 620 5623 ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Tony Pharaoh [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:57 AM To: Argentina <[email protected]>; Australia <[email protected]>; Brazil <[email protected]>; Brazil <[email protected]>; Brazil <[email protected]>; Brazil <[email protected]>; Canada <patti.parkhouse@dfo‐mpo.gc.ca>; CARIS <[email protected]>; Chile <[email protected]>; Chile <[email protected]>; C‐Map <eivind.mong@c‐map.com>; Ecuador <[email protected]>; Egypt <[email protected]>; ESRI <[email protected]>; Dana Kuznetsova <[email protected]>; Finland <[email protected]>; France <[email protected]>; Furuno <[email protected]>; Furuno <[email protected]>; Germany <[email protected]>; Germany <[email protected]>; IC‐ENC <liz.hahessy@ic‐enc.org>; IC‐ENC <richard.fowle@ic‐enc.org>; IEHG <[email protected]>; IHB <[email protected]>; IIC <[email protected]>; India HO <ia‐ inho‐[email protected]>; Italy <[email protected]>; Japan <[email protected]>; Navtor <[email protected]>; Netherlands <[email protected]>; New Zealand <[email protected]>; Northrop Grumman <[email protected]>; Norway <odd‐[email protected]>; Ceri Carter <[email protected]>; Poland <[email protected]>; Portugal <[email protected]>; Primar <[email protected]>; Republic of Korea <[email protected]>; Russian Federation <[email protected]>; SevenCs <[email protected]>; Singapore <thai_low_ying‐[email protected]>; 1 Slovinia <[email protected]>; Sweden <[email protected]>; Transas <[email protected]>; Ukraine <[email protected]>; UK <[email protected]>; USA ‐ NOAA <[email protected]>; USA ‐ NOAA Federal <[email protected]> Subject: Documents for your approval Dear Colleagues, Please find attached the new Draft S‐58 Edition 6.0.0 documents for your comments and final approval. Please note there is a complete clean version of the publication and individual redline versions for each of the sections. Please use the attached comments form to submit comments before the 9th of September. If you do not have any comments to the content of the document, would you please indicate your approval of the document. All responses should be sent to Richard Fowle (), copy to [email protected]. On the 19th of August, you would also have received a copy of ENCWG Letter 2 requesting your approval on proposed text concerning "Checking the IHO presentation Library edition number in the ECDIS." For those who have not responded to Letter 2, would you please do so before the 5th of Sept. All responses should be sent to the ENCWG chair Tom Mellor ([email protected]) ‐ copy to [email protected]. As the cutoff date for HSSC submissions is 23th of Sept we would be grateful for you early responses so that the necessary HSSC papers can be prepared in time for submission to the meeting. Thanks for your cooperation. Best regards, Tony 2 Draft S-58 Edition 6.0.0 Comment Form 1 CO Section Column (e.g. Type of Comment (justification for change) Proposed change by the CO Secretariat 2 3 Page No. Check comment by the CO (All comments MUST include observations on each Check No. description) proposed revised wording) comment submitted 1.4 Guidelines ed “i” missing Each check is a statement which EE Page 5 on the check generates a Critical Error, Error or syntax Warning if the expression returns ‘true’. COVERED_BY ed Delete redundant “i” 6. Point (a) is COVERED_BY Poiint EE Page 13 (not a standard (b): Point a EQUALS Point b ISO 19125-1 operator), point 6 Last ed Insert space LineStrings following a portion of a EE Page 14 paragraph, Polygon boundary or Polygons second sharing a boundary portion. sentence Hard to understand why WITHIN was changed to COVERED_BY in many places in the standard. For example, Check 54c - For each BUISGL or CRANES feature object which is not COVERED_BY a BRIDGE, COALNE, DAMCON, EE In general COVERED_BY FLODOC, HRBFAC, LNDARE, OFSPLF, PILPNT, PONTON, PYLONS or SLCONS feature object. Meaning is the same, but WITHIN was more logical. BUISGL is not covered by LNDARE, BUISGL is situated on LNDARE. There are two choices and only one can be EE Check No 9c Check solution chosen. Set MASK to 1 (mask) OR 2 (show). EE Check No 46 Check solution Solution should be more exact. Ensure DATSTA is Less than DATEND Check No Ensure SLOGRD is covered by a EE Check solution Solution should be more exact. 53a LNDARE Check No Ensure SLOTOP is covered by a EE Check solution Solution should be more exact. 53b LNDARE 1  Draft S-58 Edition 6.0.0 Comment Form 1 CO Section Column (e.g. Type of Comment (justification for change) Proposed change by the CO Secretariat 2 3 Page No. Check comment by the CO (All comments MUST include observations on each Check No. description) proposed revised wording) comment submitted For each DAYMAR feature object which Please check the existence of DAYMAR is not COVERED_BY a BRIDGE, Check No situated on BOYXXX. Maybe it was meant BCNXXX, COALNE, DAMCON, EE Check solution 54b BCNXXX? FLODOC, LNDARE, OFSPLF, PILPNT, Amend SLCON to SLCONS. PONTON, PYLONS, SLCONS or UWTROC. Ensure LNDARE is not covered by a EE Check No 55 Check solution Solution should be more exact. LNDARE Ensure CBLSUB is not covered by a EE Check No 60 Check solution Solution should be more exact. LNDARE EE Check No 97 Check solution Solution should be more exact. Ensure SURSTA is Less than SUREND For each DEPARE, DRGARE, FLODOC, HULKES, LNDARE PONTON, or UNSARE feature object of geometric Check No Check EE Delete redundant comma primitive area that OVERLAP another 519b description DEPARE, DRGARE, FLODOC, HULKES, LNDARE, PONTON or UNSARE of geometric primitive area. Check No Not clear why the check is removed to EE 1000 Check No 1006 Not clear why the check is removed to Check No EE Check No 1007 and after deleted at all 1001 although it was Critical Error Check No Not clear why the check is removed to EE 1002 Check No 1008 Check No Not clear why the check is removed to EE 1003 Check No 1009 Check No Not clear why the check is removed to EE 1004 Check No 1010 Check No Not clear why the check is removed to EE 1005 Check No 1011 Check No For each CBLARE feature object of Check SBDARE was deleted from Check 1500a, also geometric primitive area which is WITHIN EE description/ description, but it is in check message. I page 4 Check check message suppose it should remain. OR OVERLAPS a LNDARE OR SBDARE 1500a feature object of geometric primitive area. 2  Draft S-58 Edition 6.0.0 Comment Form 1 CO Section Column (e.g. Type of Comment (justification for change) Proposed change by the CO Secretariat 2 3 Page No. Check comment by the CO (All comments MUST include observations on each Check No. description) proposed revised wording) comment submitted For each feature object (excluding SOUNDG, DEPCNT, DEPARE, Check No Check EE Maybe UWTROC should also be excluded? DRGARE, UWTROC and OBSTRN) 1548 description where SORIND is notNull AND SORDAT is Null OR not Present. For each LAKARE feature object Check No Check EE Include or amend to OVERLAPS which EQUALS or OVERLAPS a 1602 description SEAARE feature object For each CANALS feature object Check No Check EE Include or amend to OVERLAPS which EQUALS or OVERLAPS a 1609 description SEAARE object. Check No Remove HORCLR, HORACC, EE Check solution Include HORACC 1613 VERACC or VERCLR Check No Check >0 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, OR 9 OR not EE ed Amend redundant “OR” to comma. 1657 description Present For each LIGHTS feature object where CATLIT is Equal to 17 Check No Check EE ed (emergency) AND its does not 1758 description EQUAL that of another the main LIGHTS feature object. SOUNDG object with depth less than Check No Check message does not contain DRGARE EE Check message or equal to the DRVAL1 value of the 1768 mentioned in check description underlying DEPARE or DRGARE. Check No Remove value of CONDTN or use EE Check solution Solution should be more exact. 1785 appropriate LNDMRK object. For each DWRTCL, RECTRC and RCRTCL feature object of geometric primitive line where ORIENT is Check No Check notNull AND TRAFIC is Equal to 4 EE ed Delete redundant comma 1789a description (two-way) AND the bearing of the line is more than 5 degrees, Greater than OR Less than the value (or reciprocal value) of ORIENT. Check EE Check No description ed Delete redundant comma For each NAVLNE feature object of 3  Draft S-58 Edition 6.0.0 Comment Form 1 CO Section Column (e.g. Type of Comment (justification for change) Proposed change by the CO Secretariat 2 3 Page No. Check comment by the CO (All comments MUST include observations on each Check No. description) proposed revised wording) comment submitted 1789b where ORIENT is notNull AND the bearing of the line is more than 5 degrees, Greater than OR Less than the value (or reciprocal value) of ORIENT. 4