search

iho-ohi / S-102-Product-Specification

It is opened to develop S-102 Bathymetric Surface Product Specification. The contents of this repository are not offical publication in force, therefore please check the final version on the IHO website.
Other
30 stars 12 forks source link

Clause 12 (Metadata) S100_ProductSpecification.number #128

Closed rmalyankar closed 2 weeks ago

rmalyankar commented 1 month ago

199 is the number of S-102 Edition 2.2.0 in the GI registry. Edition 3.0.0 is expected to get a different number, and it will be visible in the GI registry only when the PS is formally published and appears in the Product Specification Register.

Recommend deleting the second sentence in the Remark which gives 199 as the number for S-102.

Limiting the Remark to the sentence saying "For IHO Product Specifications, these numbers should be taken from the IHO Product Specification Register in the IHO GI Registry." should suffice for now.

If an interim value is necessary, see S-104 and S-111 Eds. 2.0.0; they recommend "0" as the interim value until the "number" of a particular edition of the PS is fixed by the GI Registry.

RohdeBSH commented 1 month ago

Unfortunately, this is correct. The S-102 2.1.0 had the ID 184, which I see as a real issue for the whole standardization process. How are we supposed to prepare a correct new version for the S100WG, HSSC and the Member State Approval if we don't know the ID number in advance? This means that the new PS does not have a finalized status when it passes these committees.

This is quite a chicken and egg problem, mainly due to the design of the IHO registry. From my point of view as a software architect, it would have made sense to assign a general ID for a PS and to use a composite primary key for the respective edition of the PS. Then we wouldn't have this problem.

I personally don't recommend an interim solution or a workaround with the "0". This does not solve the problem. Developments that are based on the non-adopted PS and the PS itself must be corrected again in any case. Now that this problem has been recognized, the IHO must solve it permanently. If this means that the design of the IHO registry has to be modified, then so be it. We can't drag this problem around with us for the next 30 years.

RohdeBSH commented 1 month ago

When I take a closer look to the URL of the testbed page the ID of S-102 ed. 3.0.0 could be 215 after the publication. But this has to be check with the developers.

https://registry.iho.int/testbed/view.do?idx=215&product_ID=S-102&statusS=ALL&domainS=ALL&category=product_ID&searchValue=

hasel001 commented 2 weeks ago

Per the decision during PT20 (Agenda Item 7.1), I have modified the remark in the appropriate table and sent the updated PDF version to Jeff. Thanks to everyone for your contributions on resolving this one. I am now marking this issue closed.