Garret,

my comments prefaced with <AJS>

Garret Minakawa <garret.minakawa@...> wrote on 09/12/2004 03:19:53
PM:


> PictureType. At one point, the Architecture WG had discussed not
> implementing this data type because it was not different enough
> from GraphicType to warrant a separate data type. If a user had
> a picture, they should just use GraphicType. What do you think?
> Keep PictureType or remove it from the OAGIS implementation?

<AJS>Remove this type, Graphic is fine</AJS>

> BinaryObject - MimeCode Supplementary Component. In the ATG2
> NDR, it designates this attribute as required. I have two
> questions here. 1) should it be required? and 2) if it is
> required, are some of the other supplementary components relevant
> (e.g. encoding code, format)?

<AJS>I believe that this should be an optional component. ACORD's standard
for file attachments also
does not require this component.</AJS>

> RateType. I'd like to recommend that we do not implement this
> data type because I don't think there is a globally accepted
> definition or use of this term. For example, when I think of
> rate, I think of something like "rate of acceleration" or "rate
> of descent" which would be expressed as [number uom/uom] (50
> miles/hour). Do you agree?

<AJS>Agreed -- do not implement</AJS>

> ValueType. I'd also like to recommend that OAGIS not implement
> this data type. The argument is not as clear as with RateType,
> but I question whether there is enough distinction between
> NumericType and ValueType to justify ValueType.

<AJS>Agreed -- do not implement</AJS>

> TextType - LanguageLocaleIdentifier SupplementaryComponent. I
> understand what this is and how it may be useful in certain
> situations but I do not know of any real cases where this is
> actually used. Furthermore, a colleague pointed out that the
> built-in XML Schema type xsd:language is based on RFC 1766 and
> not ISO 639. If you read RFC 1766
> (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1766.txt), you will notice that the
> concept of language locale is included in the language
> representation. Therefore, from a technical XML Schema
> perspective, LanguageLocaleIdentifier is not necessary.

<AJS>Given that fact, I would also agree with this.

> IdentifierType. The ATG2 NDR only uses two of the possible seven
> supplementary components available for this data type -
> IdentificationSchemeDataURI and IdentificationSchemeURI. I don't
> understand why the other supplementary components were excluded
> and believe they would be useful in many situations. Do you
> agree and if yes, do you have any recommendations about which of
> the Identifier supplementary components should or should not be
> used?

<AJS>I would think the version, agency name and agency name identifier are
important to know also</AJS>


Regards,

Alan Stitzer
AVP, Mgr Global Standards
Marsh USA, Inc
253 Coconut Pt
Jupiter, FL 33458
USA

office: 561 743 1938
mobile: 561 371 5339
fax: 561 743 1993