From: R Knapp (gyp_caver_at_yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Mar 12 2002 - 12:44:17 CET
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 05A6013C2A for <cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch>; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 12:51:50 +0100 (CET) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 28) id 0DF3613BF7; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 12:51:46 +0100 (CET) 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 BAE4513C2A for <cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch>; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 12:51:45 +0100 (CET) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 96) id C376213BF6; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 12:51:42 +0100 (CET) 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 6857713C2A for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 12:51:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp012.mail.yahoo.com (smtp012.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.173.32]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with SMTP id 9EE4113BF0 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 12:51:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from gyp?caver (AUTH login) at slip-12-66-8-57.mis.prserv.net (HELO Muphin) (gyp?caver_at_12.66.8.57) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2002 11:50:43 -0000 From: "R Knapp" <gyp_caver_at_yahoo.com> To: "cavexml_at_cartography.ch" <cavexml_at_cartography.ch> Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 06:44:17 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: PMMail 2.20.2380 for OS/2 Warp 4.5 In-Reply-To: <3C8CEB73.45C966DA_at_xmission.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: "Ignore" attribute Message-Id: <20020312115138.9EE4113BF0@karmail.ethz.ch> 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
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 10:37:55 -0700, P A Hill & E V Goodall wrote:
> R Knapp wrote:
> > Would something along the line of:
> >
> > <Azimuth direction="Front" value="340" ignore="yes"/>
> >
> > work? Or maybe:
> >
> > <Azimuth value="340" process="no"/>
>
> Is it really a binary yes/no value or is it more like:
>[snip]
> But your story also provides a clue. Did you say you took several shots?
> Put those in the data set! Does you software not support multiple azimuths
> on the same shot? Shame on it!
I can enter them in my XML format but not in any cave processing program I've seen. BTW,
weren't you writing that section? <G>
But an interesting side topic you have raised: how to record multiple readings in a
survey book. The two line format would be rather burdensome since it only has space for
front and backsight information. It would almost be some kind of mutation of the one line
format (all data on one line), wouldn't it?
Ex:
From To Dist Az Incl
A1 A2 10 340 -10
A1 A2 337
A1 A2 348
But that leaves an awful lot of blanks.
> This makes me think off another way to categorize such things a tag that
> allows the surveyor to say which one they thought was the best, but maybe
> not, for I know I'd always be biased toward picking the middle value,
> so maybe just:
>
> <Azimuth value="340" goodness="not very good"/>
> <Azimuth value="337" goodness="extremely poor"/>
> <Azimuth value="348" goodness="okay"/>
Goodness, eh? Did you ever read the book "Up Sh_t Creek"? In the stories, they refer to
the goodness as the product of using the Groover (sh_t box). So "goodness='okay'" takes
on a very different meaning.
> A simple program could just take one value, a more sophisticated one
> could work with all values.
Sounds like weighting but instead of higher values for the more reliable readings, a word
is assigned. I prefer the use of the numeric weight _but_ it may be misinterpreted: to
some, a higher value may mean better; to others, a lower value would. Weighting might be
the more correct term but I think it might be misleading to the average surveyor.
I do like the ability to designate levels of confidence in the reading. So, if we just
simplify the categories (no CDATA allowed here), we could have something like:
<!ELEMENT Azimuth EMPTY>
<!ATTLIST Azimuth
direction (Front | Back) "Front"
reading CDATA #IMPLIED
value CDATA #REQUIRED
confidence (High | Med | Low | None) "High"
units (%AzimuthUnits;) #IMPLIED
correction CDATA #IMPLIED>
where
direction specifies a front or back sight
reading is entered values not in canonical units
value is the canonical value (or reading if the units match)
confidence specifies the level of confidence in this reading
units allows for overriding survey units
correction to allow for a correct to be applied to this reading/value
The default would be the highest confidence in the reading.
> Also, "Ignore" and "process" assume there is only one place to
> "ignore" or "process" something. Is this really the case?
> I'd want to lean to a more specific attribute name. But that doesn't
> mean I have a good name off the top of my head.
You are correct. That level of exclusion might better be handled by a shot level
exclusion (or something similar). If you have used Compass, you can exclude a shot on
three levels: Closure, Length, Plot (or all three). Handy if you just want to remove a
previous shot from calculations without deleting it from the data set.
Richard Knapp
gyp_caver_at_yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Mar 31 2002 - 23:00:01 CEST