1. Annex 15, Amdt. 38, Ch 6. The Pro’s and Cons’ of Thematic Data Sets

2. Single Data Set – Pro’s FR - easier for providers to implement;
UK – less costly on industry to fund;
ECTL - Well tailored to the needs of the commercial data publishers;
ECTL - Cheaper for AIS/States;
ECTL - Might strengthen the business case for SWIM-compliant services (query/reply, notification, etc.); some could be value-added.

3. Single Data Set – Con’s 1.
FR - Too far reaching (all data needs to be available) - little room for stepped approach;
FR - The single dataset may in practice be made of different data sets (eg AIP data + terrain data + eTOD) because of practical aspects (size, format, etc.);
FR - How do we deal with existing provisions (eTOD and AMDB) ?;

4. Single Data Set – Con’s 2.
SV - The State has a responsibility to provide information, to make it available in only single datasets will decrease the accessibility compared with the situation today
UK - There may be three data sets, AIP, Terrain An Obstacle.
UK – Costs of refining single data set lie with 3rd party providers.

5. Single Data Set – Con’s 3.
ECTL - Other users will need to filter out a lot of unnecessary data;
ECTL - Against the current general IT/Internet trends of providing just what is required and not to dump (and overload) all;
ECTL - Band-width and file processing problems due to files that can be several hundreds of MB in size;
 ECTL - Data in datasets will not be provided in a single format (e.g. terrain and topography in geofile and obstacles/AIP in AIXM

6. Thematic Data Set – Pro’s 1.
FR - Continuity with current Annex 15 (at least for eTOD and AMDBs);
FR - Easier for the users to get data of immediate interest;
FR - In line with a stepped approach: terrain and obstacle data can be a "shall" since it is already one in the current SARPs, other data sets may be "shoulds" first then "upgraded to shalls“;
FR -The updates may be more relevant per theme than globally (eg nav data update do not imapct terrain, obstacles, etc.).

7. Thematic Data Set – Pro’s 2.
SV - Digital data distribution is the best way to decrease the costs in the AIS production and thematic datasets are more adopted to individual user needs;
UK - More choice for bulk data users in industry;
ECTL - Better fits the needs of individual users (e.g. ATC does not need all);
ECTL - Easier to deal with the current Standard/Recommended Practice provisions of e.g. ETOD/AMDB ;
ECTL - Gives the possibility to AIS to understand who and how is using the digital data. 

8. Thematic Data Set – Con’s 1.
FR - Puts some constraints on providers (multiple data sets to be released every AIRAC cycle);
UK - Benefits e.g. costs savings will not be passed on to the end user;
UK - More costs on industry;

9. Thematic Data Set – Con’s 2.
ECTL - More work for AIS 
ECTL - More work for this group also to investigate the needs of the various groups and to identify the data set content 
ECTL - Might weaken the business case for value added value services , such as on-line query/reply services  

10. Other Comments
SV - From a flight safety perspective it is important that datasets are available in a format that fits the needs of individual users and without extra charges;
UK - Thematic data sets could only be a recommendation and introduced in a phased approach;
ECTL - It is suggested to limit the number of thematic datasets and to provide guidance on how to provide filter-query functionality (to avoid 200 different implementations)

11. Questions