Content is displayed in English.
เนื้อหาจะแสดงในภาษาที่เลือก
หากไม่มีภาษาแปล
เนื้อหาจะแสดงเป็นภาษาอังกฤษ
หากไม่มีภาษาแปล
เนื้อหาจะแสดงเป็นภาษาอังกฤษ
El contenido se muestra en el idioma seleccionado; si no hay traducción disponible, se mostrará en inglés.
El contenido se muestra en el idioma seleccionado; si no hay traducción disponible, se mostrará en inglés.
Il contenuto viene visualizzato nella lingua selezionata; se non è disponibile la traduzione, verrà mostrato in inglese.
Kandungan dipaparkan dalam bahasa yang dipilih; jika terjemahan tidak tersedia, kandungan akan dipaparkan dalam bahasa Inggeris.
Innholdet vises på det valgte språket; hvis oversettelse ikke er tilgjengelig, vises det på engelsk.
内容将显示为所选语言；
若无翻译，则显示为英文。
若无翻译，则显示为英文。
Sadržaj se prikazuje na odabranom jeziku; ako prijevod nije dostupan, prikazat će se na engleskom jeziku.
콘텐츠는 선택한 언어로 표시됩니다. 번역이 불가능한 경우 영어로 표시됩니다.
The content of the S-101 standard is 90% identical to data prepared in accordance with the requirements of the S-57 format, thus S-101 is a syntactic replica of data in the S-57 format, while the requirements of the S-58 and S-158 standards do not coincide. Therefore, the preparation of 90% of the data for the S-101 standard can be carried out in the S-57 format, using harmonized S-58 & S-158 requirements.
Such preparation goes beyond readiness tests, but does not contradict it. It is more of a check of S-57 compliance with S-101 requirements, but for simplicity, we retain the familiar terminology.
We have identified approximately 70 tests that are present in the S-158 standard but actually relate to S-57 information. Why these requirements are not added to the S-58 standard is a rhetorical question. Especially if, in the opinion of the standard's authors, they are important for ensuring the safety of navigation.
In order to simplify and reduce the cost of preparing S-57 data for conversion to the S-101 format, we have added these tests to the S-57 Editor and Inspector. This allows for not purchasing new software, retraining cartographers, but using established production processes and personnel to perform 90% of the work to obtain quality S-101 data from S-57.
Errors corrected in S-57 will not appear in S-101 after conversion. Thus, data integrity is ensured.
This section contains a description of this procedure using the dKart S-57 Editor program.
Such preparation goes beyond readiness tests, but does not contradict it. It is more of a check of S-57 compliance with S-101 requirements, but for simplicity, we retain the familiar terminology.
We have identified approximately 70 tests that are present in the S-158 standard but actually relate to S-57 information. Why these requirements are not added to the S-58 standard is a rhetorical question. Especially if, in the opinion of the standard's authors, they are important for ensuring the safety of navigation.
In order to simplify and reduce the cost of preparing S-57 data for conversion to the S-101 format, we have added these tests to the S-57 Editor and Inspector. This allows for not purchasing new software, retraining cartographers, but using established production processes and personnel to perform 90% of the work to obtain quality S-101 data from S-57.
Errors corrected in S-57 will not appear in S-101 after conversion. Thus, data integrity is ensured.
This section contains a description of this procedure using the dKart S-57 Editor program.
Operations:
The content of the S-101 standard is 90% identical to data prepared in accordance with the requirements of the S-57 format, thus S-101 is a syntactic replica of data in the S-57 format, while the requirements of the S-58 and S-158 standards do not coincide. Therefore, the preparation of 90% of the data for the S-101 standard can be carried out in the S-57 format, using harmonized S-58 & S-158 requirements.
Such preparation goes beyond readiness tests, but does not contradict it. It is more of a check of S-57 compliance with S-101 requirements, but for simplicity, we retain the familiar terminology.
We have identified approximately 70 tests that are present in the S-158 standard but actually relate to S-57 information. Why these requirements are not added to the S-58 standard is a rhetorical question. Especially if, in the opinion of the standard's authors, they are important for ensuring the safety of navigation.
In order to simplify and reduce the cost of preparing S-57 data for conversion to the S-101 format, we have added these tests to the S-57 Editor and Inspector. This allows for not purchasing new software, retraining cartographers, but using established production processes and personnel to perform 90% of the work to obtain quality S-101 data from S-57.
Errors corrected in S-57 will not appear in S-101 after conversion. Thus, data integrity is ensured.
This section contains a description of this procedure using the dKart S-57 Editor program.
Such preparation goes beyond readiness tests, but does not contradict it. It is more of a check of S-57 compliance with S-101 requirements, but for simplicity, we retain the familiar terminology.
We have identified approximately 70 tests that are present in the S-158 standard but actually relate to S-57 information. Why these requirements are not added to the S-58 standard is a rhetorical question. Especially if, in the opinion of the standard's authors, they are important for ensuring the safety of navigation.
In order to simplify and reduce the cost of preparing S-57 data for conversion to the S-101 format, we have added these tests to the S-57 Editor and Inspector. This allows for not purchasing new software, retraining cartographers, but using established production processes and personnel to perform 90% of the work to obtain quality S-101 data from S-57.
Errors corrected in S-57 will not appear in S-101 after conversion. Thus, data integrity is ensured.
This section contains a description of this procedure using the dKart S-57 Editor program.
Operations: