S-164_1.1/V2/3.1 ENC Display/Other/Mangrove

[plebihan29n]

Some S57 Mangrove instance (VEGATN,CATCOV7) have been encode in the test dataset "AA5OTHER". These kind of features could be converted to S101 Obstruction feature if they overlap "depth " areas. This is not the case in this dataset as they overlap "land area"

Proposal : Move these instance in order to overlap some depth areas ?

[DavidGrant-NIWC]

Could be useful for checking alerts and ensuring portrayal matches expectations.

[plebihan29n]

This proposal has been encoded in the delivered version 3 of S-164

[DavidGrant-NIWC]

It's there, but it doesn't match the encoding guidance:

• Coastline is missing
• Should cover an intertidal (foreshore) area
  • depth area depth range minimum should be less than zero
  • depth area depth range maximum should be zero
• Water Level Effect should be one.
• Height is missing
• Seaward spatial should have association to spatial quality with quality of horizontal measurement = 4 (approximate).

Also, recommend adding a mangrove point:

[plebihan29n]

The content of the dataset has been modified taking account your proposal. In addition I have also qualify with horizontal measurement = 4 (approximate), the spatial object that is shared with the coastline and with the mangrove

[plebihan29n]

[DavidGrant-NIWC]

Recommend adding an additional feature

• Coastline with category of coastline = 7 (Mangrove)

Data quality issue

• The portion of the coastline which intersects the mangrove should not have a value populated for quality of horizontal measurement.

Minor encoding issues applicable to point and area objects

• The mandatory attribute water level effect should be populated with 1 (partially submerged at high water) rather than 4 (Covers and Uncovers)
• Surrounding depth should be -10:
• I don't think default clearance depth should be populated (because the feature is not underwater):

[plebihan29n]

1 : I find strange to not encode quality of measurement on the coastline even if the "mangrove area" is now in the display base display category (!= S-52). This quality information could be confirm that the coastline is not accurate. 2 : You write "I don't think default clearance depth should be populated (because the feature is not underwater):" : is it a rule from the DCEG ? . Perhaps could be useful to encode it for example ? if yes , I guess that the value is -5m as I have encode a height of 5m 3 : In this dataset , we have an another "mangrove area" , I propose to encode it along the coastline as "apparent coastline" due to generalization (for example again), do you think this could be useful ?

[DavidGrant-NIWC]

3 : In this dataset , we have an another "mangrove area" , I propose to encode it along the coastline as "apparent coastline" due to generalization (for example again), do you think this could be useful ?

Yes.

For 1 and 2, I guess those are questions for the DCEG group / Jeff W.

[plebihan29n]

The current encoding of "mangrove area" as an obstruction.

[plebihan29n]

The current encoding of "mangrove line" as a coastline.

[DavidGrant-NIWC]

Looks good other than the outstanding DCEG questions