IHO / OHI Home

Search
   
Members

Calendar

Help

Home
Search by username
Not logged in - Login | Register 
IHO / OHI > IHO > Hydrographic Dictionary > Terms 10 - 19 from S-52 which were not included in S-32 Appendix 1 (ECDIS Glossary)


Terms 10 - 19 from S-52 which were not included in S-32 Appendix 1 (ECDIS Glossary)
 Moderated by: ihbpah  

New Topic

Reply

Print
AuthorPost
ihbpah
Administrator
 

Joined: Wed Feb 8th, 2006
Location: Monaco, Monaco
Posts: 107
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Thu Sep 9th, 2010 08:27 am

Quote

Reply
This is the second of the three groups of terms from S-52. Please note there are some relationships between terms in each of the 3 groups so it is worth looking at them all before commenting on a particular term.

Attachment: Terms 10-19.zip (Downloaded 5 times)

ihbpah
Administrator
 

Joined: Wed Feb 8th, 2006
Location: Monaco, Monaco
Posts: 107
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Sep 29th, 2010 07:27 am

Quote

Reply
With respect to the definition of NAVAREA please see my general comments under terms 1-9. S-53 defines NAVAREA as:

NAVAREA means a geographical sea area (may include inland seas, lakes and waterways navigable by sea-going ships) established for the purpose of coordinating the broadcast of navigational warnings.  The term NAVAREA followed by a roman numeral may be used to identify a particular sea area.  The delimitation of such areas is not related to and shall not prejudice the delimitation of any boundaries between States.

 

For IMO I have taken some text from their web page, and also from the Wikpipedia entry and made a small adjustment to make it more readable for our purpose and suggest the following:

 

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations whose primary role is to develop and maintain a comprehensive regulatory framework for shipping. Its remit includes safety, environmental concerns, legal matters, technical co-operation, maritime security and the efficiency of shipping. IMO was formerly called the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO).

JerryMills
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Oct 6th, 2010 07:34 pm

Quote

Reply
10.  GNSS - I think the first part of the Wikipedia definition should be added.  "The standard generic term for satellite navigation systems ("sat nav") that provide autonomous geo-spatial positioning with global coverage.  As of 2010, GPS and GLONASS are the only operational systems with new systems (the E.U's Galileo and China's Beidou) expected by 2020.

11.  GLONASS - OK

12.  GPS - OK

13.  Heading - No, current S-32 definition is more inclusive.

14.  IHO INT 1 - No

15.  INT1 - No

16.  IEC - I wasn't inclined to include it but given the presence of all the other international organizations in S-32, OK.

17.  IMO - OK per your suggested rewording.

18.  Local datum - No

19.  NAVAREA - Yes.

Jerry

ihbpah
Administrator
 

Joined: Wed Feb 8th, 2006
Location: Monaco, Monaco
Posts: 107
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 12th, 2010 05:50 am

Quote

Reply
For GNSS I like the proposal from Jerry. However do we require the final sentence "As of 2010 ... expected by 2020."? I am not strongly against this simply asking the question.

NAVAREA - assume Jerry is supporting my proposal taken from S-53?

Otherwise I agree with Jerry's proposals.

JerryMills
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 12th, 2010 06:25 pm

Quote

Reply
The reason behind my suggestion to include the last sentence for the GNSS definition was to prepare readers that other systems are likely in the near future.  This will make the term more forward looking and less likely to need updating in the next few years.

For NAVAREA, my yes vote was for Steve's proposal from S-53.

jwootton
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 25th, 2010 05:13 am

Quote

Reply
Again apologies for the late response.  I agree with all comments with but would like to add the following:

GNSS and GLONASS: is it appropriate to have two acoronyms in the dictionary expanding to the same term?  Is it intended that there be two entries for Global Navigation Satellite System?  Suggest that the term only be listed once in S-32 with the two acronyms defined seperately (i.e. "1." (GNSS) and "2." (GLONASS) within the term.

Heading:  Suggest the text "(TRUE, MAGNETIC or COMPASS)" be retained from the existing S-32 definition as "north" is not uniquely defined in S-32.

IHO INT1:  The proposed definition is too restrictive, as it refers to the International Chart Series of the IHO.  INT1 is also designed for national chart series which are not designated as INT charts.  Additionally, INT1 is not in itself a "specification" but a compendium of symbols derived from IHO S-4, for use principally by the mariner, and as such is a bunch of explanatory pictures.  Suggest the definition be amended to read:  "The compendium [or hanbook(?)] of symbols, abbreviations and terms to be used on NAUTICAL CHARTS, for use principally as a reference by mariners, as derived from the "Regulations of the IHO for International (INT) Charts and Chart Specifications of the IHO" (IHO S-4).".

NAVAREA:  Agree with the definition as taken from S-53.  Suggest the "The short title for a" as used in the S-52 definition be included at the start of the definition, and NAVIGATIONAL WARNINGS be in capitals.

JerryMills
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Oct 27th, 2010 04:35 pm

Quote

Reply
GNSS and GLONASS - Jeff's comments really bring to light a question about what terms are most likely to be referenced.  After thinking about this, I don't think too many people will be searching for "Global Navigation Satellite System".  Rather, I believe they will search for the meaning/definition of GNSS and GLONASS.  if that is correct, then perhaps these should be the terms to be defined, with the definition for GNSS as I proposed.  This raises the question about how GPS (Global Positioning System) should be referenced - either way is OK with me.

IHO INT 1 and INT 1 - My initial reaction was not to include either term in S-32.  I've changed my opinion on this.  I'm not too familiar with this but according to S-4: "INT1 Symbols, Abbreviations, Terms used on Charts - Provides the chart user with a key to symbols and abbreviations used on charts compiled in accordance with these specifications. Although it may be used by cartographers as a quick reference, the specifications should always be used for detailed guidance."  From this it appears that INT 1 is restricted to symbols, abbreviations and terms.  This is not to be confused with INT (international) charts.  Let me know if this is correct or not.

NAVAREA - Either way is OK with me.  Jeff's proposal makes it a little clearer but there may be some benefit in retaining the S-53 definition exactly.

jwootton
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Oct 27th, 2010 10:32 pm

Quote

Reply
There is very little distinction between "IHO INT1" and just "INT1".  The best way that I think I can explain this is that there are many "national" INT1s (Symbols, Abbreviations, Terms Used on Charts), such as UKs BA5011 and US Chart 1.  Three of these national INT1s have been adopted by the IHO as the official international language versions of INT1; these being the French, Spanish and German (English) versions - these are the versions that I would consider to be "IHO INT1", and each carry the IHO crest in adddition to the respective national crest.  All INT1s contain the approved international symbols as shown in S-4 (with some minor variations on size, shape etc in line with the national flavour - hence my previous comment that INT1 is not a "specification") in the left column, and additional "national" symbols in the right column (where applicable).  While each nation is responsible for individually maintaining their national INT1s, the French, Spanish and German INT1s are maintained through the INT1 Sub-Working Group, which is a sub-working group of the IHO CSPCWG, in order to provide consistency between the documents.  Other national INT1s would then be expected to be modified accordingly.  From this perpsective, and to cover both INT and National chart series, I suggest that the term to be defined is just "INT1".

ihbpah
Administrator
 

Joined: Wed Feb 8th, 2006
Location: Monaco, Monaco
Posts: 107
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Nov 3rd, 2010 02:25 pm

Quote

Reply
I believe that I have captured the essence of our discussion so far in the attached.

Attachment: Terms 10-19-Final.zip (Downloaded 3 times)

JerryMills
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Nov 3rd, 2010 03:53 pm

Quote

Reply
As I mentioned before, I think the terms should be GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) and GLONASS (Global Navigation satellite System) not Global naivagion Satellite System (GNSS) and Global Navigation Satellite System(GLONASS).  Similarly, I prefer GPS (Global Positoning System).

I concur with all of the other definitions.

jwootton
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Nov 3rd, 2010 10:59 pm

Quote

Reply
I agree with Jerry's suggestion regarding GNSS, GLONASS and GPS.  My only concern is that we may be creating an inconsistency, as can be seen forther down this list of terms with IEC and IMO (the acronyms are bracketed rather than the full name).  Is this an issue?  Considering this in relation to Jerry's first comments in this discussion, I typed in "IMO" in the on-line dictionary search engine, which returned only the entry in the Abbreviations.  Will the every day user know then that if they want the definition for the International Maritime Organisation they will need to type the full name?  Perhaps there is something that can be done with the links i.e. have the user typed in abbreviation (acronym) link to both the dictionary abbreviation and the definition (if it exists).

From an editorial perspective, words requiring capitalisation (e.g. "navigation") need to be addressed.

ihbpah
Administrator
 

Joined: Wed Feb 8th, 2006
Location: Monaco, Monaco
Posts: 107
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Nov 10th, 2010 06:31 am

Quote

Reply
I have been through the list and hopefully have picked up all the entries which need capitalisation.

Regarding the "search" aspect. I am fairly certain that it is only possible to provide a single link but will double check. However there is an answer to this issue which maybe we should describe in the "help documents" when we write them or on the "welcome page". If you type an entry such as "IMO" which exists in the WIKI then clicking on "GO" will find that exact match and nothing else. However if you click on "Search" it will return the entry plus any other definitions which include that word and finally it will also return any definitions that include the word in the text of the definition.

If you type a word that is not in the dictionary e.g. "IMCO" both "Go" and "Search" will return all occurrences of the term.

Attachment: Terms 10-19-Final.zip (Downloaded 2 times)


 Current time is 04:43 pm




Powered by WowBB 1.7 - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez