[Platforms] New name, new code?

Tue Mar 24 08:15:03 GMT 2009

Hi Neil,

I totally agree that our only way of recording governance is weak.  However, I'm not convinced that issuing a new code on a name change only when governance changes is the best thing to do.  The world of seafarers is one with which I am not totally familiar and it keeps delivering me surprises.  It's also one where getting detailed information can be akin to getting blood out of a stone.

>From what I can see, it is perfectly possible for a governance to rename a ship part way through their ownership of her.  The UK Navy seems to do this quite frequently, such as the new HMS Endurance that served for a while as HMS Polar Circle. I think that this should be sufficient to require a new code.  If not, 'HMS Polar Circle' simply disappears from the record.

Having said this we need to be careful to ascertain what represents a change of name.  Quite often multiple names are in use for a single ship in parallel due to differences in spelling or degree of abbreviation.  We need to be careful not to give each of these a separate code.

As it's related, I will now move onto your Q4.  First, I appreciate the risks in defining ship's country as 'flag' (country of registration), through issues like flags of convenience but it seems to be the unit of currency of the maritime industry and therefore is readily accessible.  The only alternative I can see would be to use 'country of governance organisation', which could be equally unstable, could possibly be more vague and more difficult to obtain for legacy codes. I would therefore support 'flag'. 

Secondly, I like the idea of labelling codes with information on who was using the ship for what, but with an  'ownership' attribute we need to be very careful. My first concern is how would the organisation be represented - plaintext name or reference in a standard address book like EDMO? Then we have the problem of defining a ship's 'governance'.  Look at how the main German vessels are managed with a commercial company engaged to run the ships for an example of possible problems.  Who would we take as the governance for Meteor? Finally, what would we do if a governing organisation changed - say it was taken over by another? I know I introduced the idea of creating new codes on governance change, but I'm starting to have serious doubts. 

Cheers, Roy.

>>> "Neil Holdsworth" <NeilH at ices.dk> 03/19/09 11:31 AM >>>
Hi Roy,

To stay focused on your 1st issue, this relates to question 4 in the
spreadsheet as what you are describing is a change in governance that
causes a change in the name. So we need to be strict about how we
attribute governance, as you are right that this would trigger a new
code, but it's the governance not the name that is the trigger.

Neil.

-----Original Message-----
From: platforms-bounces at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk
[mailto:platforms-bounces at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Roy Lowry
Sent: 19 March 2009 10:09
To: platforms at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk; Neil Holdsworth
Cc: Hjalte Parner
Subject: [Platforms] New name, new code?

Dear All,

There are several issues raised by Neil's spreadsheet on when to assign
a new code.  I suggest that we discuss these one at a time to keep the
discussion clear and help us reach closure. Here's the first issue of
concern to me.

The first issue is whether a new code should be assigned when a hull
changes name. I feel strongly that it should.  Consider the following
example.  RRS Charles Darwin was sold to Gardline and renamed Ocean
Researcher.  If no new code is issued then the name assigned to '74AB'
is changed from Charles Darwin to Ocean Researcher.  The effect of this
on any 'simple' systems (like BODC, USNODC and many more) that store the
code in metadata and dynamically translate in into a name using simple
lookup is to wipe Charles Darwin from the metadata record.  This is not
what we require.  What we want is the ability to label metadata from the
code with the name of the ship as it was at the time of the cruise. (NB
a new code was assigned to Ocean Researcher when I made this case to
ICES before Marilynn took over the ship codes).

I appreciate the complications new code new name causes, particularly
with merchant ships that often change hands and names frequently,
sometimes going back to the original name, but we have to live with this
and use commissioned/decommissioned dates to document what happened.
Howevere, I think we only need to bother with the periods of ships'
histories when they were oceanographically active.

I also appreciate that the ideal way to manage ships would be to have a
code for the hull accompanied by a set of time stamped attributes
front-ended by a lookup specifying both code and timestamp of required
attributes(the way we manage organisations inside BODC).  However, with
the ship code system we inherited this is sadly impossible.

Could people who agree with my view or can raise viable alternative
arguments please let it be known on the list.

Cheers, Roy.

>>> "Neil Holdsworth" <NeilH at ices.dk> 3/12/2009 12:03 pm >>>
Dear platform group,

Over the last few weeks a number of emails have been circulating for
discussion regarding criteria and attributes for platforms and what
triggers a new platform code assignment. It is very difficult to keep
track of the various discussion threads especially as it involves
reading back through a number of long emails and refers to many previous
discussions that not everyone is aware of.

To simplify the issues and make a clear plan for specific actions for
the platform group, the Data centre has summarised in 2 tables
<http://www.ices.dk/datacentre/temp/platformcode_matrix.xls>  the
definitions of attributes - as we believe they now stand, and the
criteria needed for creating a platform code or assigning a new code
from an existing platform. We now ask that we use these tables and their
associated actions points as the focus for our discussions.

The new online platform code request system is in testing and it would
help immensely if we are able to reach agreement on these issues as soon
as possible. We are trying to take a pragmatic approach, knowing that
the code list and process aren't perfect and there are many inherent
flaws we are trying to eliminate or reduce while at the same time
maintaining a functioning system that can be used to support the marine
community that use platform codes. 

It is important that everyone in the platform group engages in this
exercise to ensure we develop procedures and governance that address all
potential issues. We look forward to receiving your response to this
action document.

Kind regards,

Neil

Neil Holdsworth
Head of Data Centre
International Council for the Exploration of the Sea 

Email: neil at ices.dk <mailto:neil at ices.dk> 

Web: www.ices.dk <http://www.ices.dk/> 

Tel: +45 3338 6718 

Fax: +45 3393 4215

H.C. Andersens Boulevard 44-46
1553 Copenhagen V. Denmark

Read the latest ICES Data Centre e-News
<http://www.ices.dk/datacentre/updates/DC_update.htm>  online

_______________________________________________
Platforms mailing list
Platforms at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk
http://mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/platforms

************************************************************************
**** 
Denne mail er blevet scannet af http://www.virus112.com 
************************************************************************
****