From: P A Hill & E V Goodall (goodhill_at_xmission.com)
Date: Mon Jul 01 2002 - 18:48:25 CEST
Return-Path: <owner-cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch> Delivered-To: cavexml-archive_at_cartography.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 6FA2E14ABF for <cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch>; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:42:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 28) id 4060214A0F; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:42:08 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 21FF214ABF for <cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch>; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:42:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 96) id EB0ED14874; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:42:04 +0200 (CEST) Delivered-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 9F77714ABF for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:42:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mgr4.xmission.com (mgr4.xmission.com [198.60.22.204]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 26B4E8140 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:42:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail by mgr4.xmission.com with spam-scanned (Exim 3.35 #1) id 17P4Ex-0002Yh-00 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Mon, 01 Jul 2002 10:41:28 -0600 Received: from [198.60.22.200] (helo=mail.xmission.com) by mgr4.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 17P4Ex-0002Ye-00 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Mon, 01 Jul 2002 10:41:27 -0600 Received: from goodhill.dsl.xmission.com ([198.60.114.17] helo=xmission.com) by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 17P4Ex-0003VA-00 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Mon, 01 Jul 2002 10:41:27 -0600 Message-ID: <3D2087D9.7060702@xmission.com> Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 10:48:25 -0600 From: P A Hill & E V Goodall <goodhill_at_xmission.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch Subject: Re: Progress report - cave survey data model References: <20020624141426.7999614ACD_at_karmail.ethz.ch> <5.1.0.14.1.20020701085258.01d7c460_at_popa.melbpc.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=8.0 tests=none version=2.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Loop: cavexml Sender: owner-cavexml_at_karmail.ethz.ch Precedence: bulk Reply-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11
Peter MATTHEWS wrote:
> Hi Jérôme, and welcome to the group. Thanks for your (and Richard's)
> comments about "spray shots" - a good point - I have now added a new
> entity (Rays) to cover these.
So how is a shot made to define a wall, i.e. a 'Ray', any different than a
normal shot? It seems a shot is a shot, it is just that if you did have many
shots because either you were in a big room and your team actually walked the
tape around, or you used some trick equipment that provided a bounty of shots to
various spots on the wall. I think I'd want to be able to separate the main
survey line from the rest without too much work. I'd say they are all shots. It
is just that some attribute somewhere happens to mark these extra shots as extra
in some way. Note I'd optionally mark the extra shots, so that a simple survey
with no splay shots doesn't require any special markings.
I guess I might be getting ahead of the plan, because I'm already thinking how
to organize the data instead of just letting the list of entities grow. Splay
shots should definitely be considered when designing any CaveXML data structure.
Have fun,
-Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jul 31 2002 - 23:00:00 CEST