(from a side discussion. Guido gave permission for reprinting)
==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE==================
>Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 13:38:51 +0100
>From: "Guido.Verhoeven" <Guido.Verhoeven@olvz-aalst.be>
> >We almost work with two, sometimes three, persons. This would say that
> >each person has more than 1 instrument (book and sketches, laser
> >distance meter, digital clinometer and digital compass) to handle. This
> >means also that we have some FrontSight (FS) and BackSight (BS)
> >measurements in the same Shot. In an other shot (same survey) these FS and
> >BS can be inversed for the same instrument because e.g. person1 does
> >measure the distance between station A1 and A2 and then he goes further
> >in the cave to measure the distance between station A3 and A2. We
> >do the same for the other person.
> I think I understand this correctly but to make sure. You can have some
> shots such as
>
> A1 -> A2
>
> but then have other shots
>
> A2 <- A3 (or A3 -> A2)
>
> Is this correct? Sounds similar to the leapfrog method of Brunton on
> Tripod.
>
> (I think I found all your comments but if I missed one, please ask again.)
What I would say about FS and BS :
We do a shot sometimes likes this :
a1 --> a2
at a1 is person1 and at a2 is person2
we take the clinometer from a1 --> a2 and the azimuth from a2 --> a1
so the clinometer is FS and the azimuth is BS (in the same shot)
> >> <!ELEMENT Direction EMPTY>
> >> <!ATTLIST Direction
> >> Value (Forward | Backwards) "Forward">
> >A direction for each instrument in each survey shot? 1 or more FS with 1
> >or more BS can be possible.
>
> Not exactly. This is to specify the direction of the shot between two
> stations. Instead of an implied direction as with From
> and To, this makes it more specific. For instance, I could have the
> following elements in my shot:
>
> Station Direction Station
>
> The data under it might look like
>
> 1 Forward 2
>
> for a shot from station 1 to station 2. Conversly, the direction could be
> reversed as in
>
> 1 Backwards 2
>
> which would indicate a shot from station 2 to station 1. The same could be
> entered as
>
> 2 Forward 1
>
> but I think it is nice to have the option.
this is clear (remark up)
> >> <!ELEMENT Depth EMPTY>
> >> <!ATTLIST Depth
> >> Value CDATA #REQUIRED
> >> Units (%LengthUnits;) #IMPLIED>
> >correction if 'resurvey' and the level isn't the same.
> >correction unit and value.
>
> Interesting idea. I currently have Depth as an additional attribute on a
> Station. It can be a Defined station or a Referenced
> Station. So if I go back an pick-up an underwater survey where I left off,
> I can still enter a Depth for that station and
> continue on. This kind of implies a correction value since there was a
> previous depth reading at the same station.
>
> Does this make sense?
Yes. The water can be rised eg. up for 1 meter so all the following u/w stations are in fact 1
meter higher as measured.
> >> SerialNumber CDATA #IMPLIED
> >> Owner CDATA #IMPLIED>
>
> >Who is meant by 'Owner'
>
> Who owns the piece of equipment. Not necessary, just nice to know. Actually
> might be useful if "Bob's" compass is always
> turning in bad data. (Then we can yell at Bob or "loose" the compass ;-)
the last option is the best ;-)
> >Can there be a possibility to take just coordinates?
> >e.g. we have measured the locations of some entrences, places where the
> >water goes under and comes again above the surface, etc. with the
> >possibility to connect some of them (by coloring).
> Do you mean kind of a pseudo-shot with coordinate data? Hmmm.. So
> basically like the Leg Entity (Station, Direction?,
> Station)? That doesn't quite fit into the Basic Shot since that Element
> requires a Distance, and at least one Azimuth and at
> least one Inclination. But I don't see why not. This is similar to a
> situation with precision surveys. If you just have the
> coordinates but want to show the connections between the legs.
>
> Is that correct?
It isn't a basic shot.
You have just the (UTM)coordinates. Later on you can have the possibility to eventually connect
them by a coloring.
When you have just on the surface some depressions (dolines) then they are not connected yet to
the survey of the cave. Perhaps later on can be seen on that place there is an eboulis (I
don't now the exact name in English. Eboulis is a mass of 'fallen' blocks)
> >Can there be a possibility for coloring?
> >Who did the coloring, date in and date out of the color, amount, volume of
> >the water (xx m3/sec), temperatur of the water in and out, etc.
> Do you mean specifying the coloring in the data file or having attributes
> you can specify that another program can query to
> attach coloring? COMPASS does something similar to this and it might be
> worthwhile adding. It might go in a different
> secton (not in the surveys section) so a distinction could be drawn between
> the raw survey data and some of the science
> (temperature, flow rates, etc).
> But you also bring up something not currently handled: date/time in and
> date/time out. I currently have date for the survey
> but not to handle the trip information. Is this something that needs to be
> added?
It can be usefull.
> There are some interesting points here. Could I post this on the caveXML
> list for feedback from the group?
Yes, requestion it in some better English than mine.
> Thanks for the comments and questions. Hope I found them all.
I think you did
Guido
===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE===================
- Richard Knapp
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 18:00:01 CEST