Open datexii opened 5 years ago
Date: 2000-01-01 01:01:01 +0100 From: @ingeniumfaber
Issue raised by UK during the stage "TC comment" of CEN TS 16157-2: Comment: "Clarifying meaning of "without being exclusive". What is the interpretation if two methods are used to generate an irresolvable location?" Proposal: woud it be better to make this an excusive choice? 14.00 Normal 0 21 false false false FR X-NONE X-NONE / Style Definitions / table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tableau Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} 14.00 Clarify meaning of "without being exclusive" – what is the interpretation if two methods are used that generate an irresolvable location?" Proposal: 14.00 Would it be better to make this an exclusive choice? Normal 0 21 false false false FR X-NONE X-NONE / Style Definitions / table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tableau Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} Normal 0 21 false false false FR X-NONE X-NONE / Style Definitions / table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tableau Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} -->
Date: 2000-01-01 01:01:01 +0100 From: Bard de Vries <b.devries@u-trex.nl>
Discussion in CEN TC278 WG8: This comment is relevant but cannot be accepted as such. After discussion it is considered such restriction does not appear to tackle other requests, as they need to consider the Linear class as an open container to receive any kind of linear locations. The raised issue has to be solved outside the present Technical Specification.
Date: 2000-01-01 01:01:01 +0100 From: Bard de Vries <b.devries@u-trex.nl>
Date: 2000-01-01 01:01:01 +0100 From: @iancornwellmottmac
Loic documented the decision to add to comment and user guide. This applies to Linear, Point, and Area. New text has been added to the UML comment about aggregated instances on the diagrams for each of those 3 classes. The issue is left unresolved because of the documented suggestion to update the user guide: "Beside the added note in the data model some guidance should be provided advice to users and developers in the Users’ Guide. ... Possible text: “Attention is drawn on the necessity to ensure the different location referencing realisation must be consistent by picturing the same coded geographic feature”."
Date: 2019-03-01 11:16:24 +0100 From: bugzilla admin <webmaster@datex2.eu>
--- Bug imported by webmaster@datex2.eu 2019-03-01 11:16 CET ---
This bug was previously known as bug 182 at https://bugzilla.datex2.eu/show_bug.cgi?id=182 This bug blocked bug(s) 2.
Unknown version "2.0 RC2 in product Website + docs. Setting version to "2018". Unknown platform CEN. Setting to default platform "All". Bug Status was IN_PROGRESS but everconfirmed was false Setting status to UNCONFIRMED
The issue was already discussed during the preparation of the version 3 data model and as stated by Ian, the modifications introduced. No supplementary action seems necessary.
However, it needs to be linked with issues no 504, 505 and 506 about the text of the note itself.
This issue was created automatically with bugzilla2github.py
Bugzilla Bug 61
Date: 2019-03-01T11:16:24+01:00 From: @ingeniumfaber To: Bard de Vries <b.devries@u-trex.nl>
Last updated: 2019-03-27T13:16:13+01:00