Post a comment on the text below

Reporting at surface water body level is done for each RBD. For the purpose of presentation in this guidance, the contents of reporting are structured according to the following sub-chapters:

Surface water body characterisation
Pressures and impacts on surface water bodies
Ecological status and exemptions
Chemical status of surface waters, exemptions and mixing zones

The following sections describe the contents of reporting. The UML diagram of the SWB schema is found in Annex 10.2.

Previous comments

HU - Hungary (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 25 Mar 2019 11:49:57

We recommend to provide information in the GD about in which table (class) are defined (generated) the different IDs as Schema elements. This guide contains nothing about the counter-type identification codes (IDs) in the database. It is recommended that these IDs appear among the Schema Elements in the future, with a much shorter description, of course, than the other fields (with the information whether it is generated in this table or not). Thus, you could search for the identifier directly in the GD and find out quickly in which table the identifier is generated - you do not have to search in Access with database tools.
- RO - Romania1 (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 25 Apr 2019 08:18:47
  
  We recommend to provide information in the GD about in which table (class) are defined (generated) the different IDs as Schema elements. This guide contains nothing about the counter-type identification codes (IDs) in the database. It is recommended that these IDs appear among the Schema Elements in the future, with a much shorter description, of course, than the other fields (with the information whether it is generated in this table or not). Thus, you could search for the identifier directly in the GD and find out quickly in which table the identifier is generated - you do not have to search in Access with database tools.
  
  RO supports the HU suggestion.
- EL - Greece (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 02 May 2019 10:25:29
  
  We recommend to provide information in the GD about in which table (class) are defined (generated) the different IDs as Schema elements. This guide contains nothing about the counter-type identification codes (IDs) in the database. It is recommended that these IDs appear among the Schema Elements in the future, with a much shorter description, of course, than the other fields (with the information whether it is generated in this table or not). Thus, you could search for the identifier directly in the GD and find out quickly in which table the identifier is generated - you do not have to search in Access with database tools.
  
  EL supports the HU suggestion. It would be greatly helpful to include in the GD this information about the tables in which the identifiers are generated.
NO - Norway (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 11:43:29

We support the HU suggestion
PL - Poland1 (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 14:47:29

General comment. It would be beneficial to check MS comments received during the rounds of comments on drafts of RBMPs MS national implementation reports. Some of them may have comprised of explanation of made errors in reporting done e.g. by mistake or confusion by reporters. Focusing on the parts of the reporting, where there more errors have been made, and rewording/simplifying the guidance for them would be beneficial.
BE (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 03 May 2019 15:03:34

We also support the HU suggestion

You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.