From: P A Hill & E V Goodall (goodhill_at_xmission.com)
Date: Wed Oct 16 2002 - 21:24:58 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 B0E2115934 for <cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch>; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 21:40:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 28) id 932EB15902; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 21:40:27 +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 85CED15934 for <cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch>; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 21:40:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 96) id 678C01583D; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 21:40:23 +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 228E615934 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 21:40:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mgr2.xmission.com (mgr2.xmission.com [198.60.22.202]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id C9C077D89 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 21:40:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [198.60.22.200] (helo=mail.xmission.com) by mgr2.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 181tnQ-00077n-02 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 13:25:32 -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 181tnQ-0000md-00 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 13:25:32 -0600 Message-ID: <3DADBD0A.9080409@xmission.com> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 13:24:58 -0600 From: P A Hill & E V Goodall <goodhill_at_xmission.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch Subject: Re: Other Definitions References: <5.1.0.14.1.20021011055526.01d5f200_at_popa.melbpc.org.au> <5.1.0.14.1.20021016194555.01d61390_at_popa.melbpc.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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:
> ===================================================================================
>
> Field data The original data and sketches recorded in the field,
> e.g. paper-based,
> or images thereof, or data still stored and observable in
> an instrument.
> ===================================================================================
I think I can see where you are heading, but 'still stored' seems a bit off
the mark.
The Field Data is still Field Data even if my trick Turbo 9000+ cave survey
device which I spent my last hard earned Euro buying just got kicked over a
cliff when it fell off the donkey on the way back from the cave.
But this idea of differentiating between
1. data as the survey process generated it -- "as is"
vs.
2. data in a form that is probably ready for the next step.
is a good one.
I see one problem with the definitions of "raw data" vs "field data".
The definitions don't specify whether either is in a standard form (CaveXML
etc.) I could picture the difference between "field" and "raw" as a format
change.
"field" = as the instrument spit it out (just like the image of the book
page is as we have it without changes), where the "raw" form is slightly
processed in that that it is in a regular/usable/standard form.
I guess then we might speak of SMAPS Raw Data, Compass Raw Data or CaveXML
Raw Data, but hand written field data or instrument generated field data.
So could someone write a definition which makes that distinction?
-Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 23:00:00 CET