(more on the discussion with Guido)
==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE==================
>From: "Richard Knapp" <gyp_caver@yahoo.com>
>To: "Guido.Verhoeven" <Guido.Verhoeven@olvz-aalst.be>
>Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:58:17 -0500 (EST)
>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)
This fits into the current format. Since the Azimuth and Inclination support a Back and Front Direction enumeration, you can
change that value to accomodate your data. In this instance, mark that azimuth as "Back". and the Inclination as "Front" for
a shot from A1 -> A2. This could be reversed if needed. The XML would look something like this.
<BasicShot>
<StationReference ID="A2" GUID="A2"/>
<StationDeclaration ID="A3" GUID="A3"/>
<Distance Value="3"/>
<Azimuth Direction="Back" Value="220"/>
<Inclination Direction="Front" Value="-1..5"/>
</BasicShot>
or
<BasicShot>
<StationDeclaration ID="A3" GUID="A3"/>
<StationReference ID="A2" GUID="A2"/>
<Distance Value="3"/>
<Azimuth Direction="Front" Value="220"/>
<Inclination Direction="Back" Value="-1..5"/>
</BasicShot>
In a way, it is a little bit of a kludge (fudge) but I don't know how else to handle it.
>> >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)
I created another type of 'shot' called "LegShot" that might handle this issue. It takes two stations and optional direction of
shot between them. It creates a survey leg using given coordinates. At this time, I have limited it to Rectangular coordinates
but there is no reason it could not be any of the coordinate elements.
I think that's about as far as I can go with just the data side of it. Any more than that would have to be handled during
processing.
'Eboulis' could be either collapse or breakdown. Does that sound about right?
- Richard Knapp
===================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