search

S-101-Portrayal-subWG / Working-Documents

16 stars 5 forks source link

Missing symbolisation instruction for Pontoon Point feature #142

Closed alvarosanuy closed 4 months ago

alvarosanuy commented 1 year ago

Pontoon does not have geometric primitive Point in S-57. What's the use case now? The use of point symbols would significantly exaggerate their footprint. If the product is the largest scale available to navigate in, then I would say the product is not good enough. Larger compilation scale is required. If larger scale product exists then the feature should be generalised out and not kept as a Point. Having said this, I recognise S-57 always had a Point symbol for Hulk........... (refer to Mikus/PRIMAR report on the use of Hulk in https://github.com/S-101-Portrayal-subWG/Working-Documents/issues/125)

image image

alvarosanuy commented 8 months ago

Paper submitted to NCWG9 (Nov 2023). Will leave this issue open until we get feedback from NCWG Chair.

TomRichardson6 commented 4 months ago

I note that in the 1.2.0 PC this rule results in the smiley face symbol. Propose that while NCWG discussions continue that the point LNDARE symbol but using the appropriate colour be adopted here so that a symbol displays. It seems unlikely that NCWG are going to progress this for edition 2.0.0.

MatthewCraggs commented 4 months ago

Below are the comments from NCWG9.

S-57 does not allow pontoon point features, S-101 does, is there a user need for a point feature in S-101?

Noting there are no point pontoons in S-57, the group cannot see a use-case for a point, where the scale is so small that a line cannot be drawn then the display of a point feature will make it look bigger and obliterate other charted features. Also, S-4 does not support a point feature. The USA asked what about a pontoon being used as a bridge in a river or floating swimming platforms, without this point symbol then the HO is forced to create a polygon?

Outcome: NCWG recommends retaining the S-57 approach not allowing a point feature. The specification should be flexible enough if a solid use-case is defined in the future.

alvarosanuy commented 4 months ago

NCWG decided there's No Portrayal impact. I created a new issue in the 'Documentation' GitHub space to discuss NCWG9 recommendation of removing geometric primitive Point from Pontoon.