From: Bill Frantz (frantz_at_pwpconsult.com)
Date: Fri Oct 25 2002 - 08:08:30 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 C3F7415A31 for <cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch>; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:30:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 28) id 81F7415A15; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:30:35 +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 7FFD815A31 for <cavexml-loopcheck_at_ethz.ch>; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:30:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 96) id 41CF315A14; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:30:31 +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 F409615A31 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:30:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id 66A0515A13 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 08:30:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from h-69-3-25-168.snvacaid.covad.net ([69.3.25.168] helo=[192.168.1.5]) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 184xdo-0005QK-00 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 23:08:16 -0700 X-Sender: frantz%pwpconsult.com_at_pop.business.earthlink.net Message-Id: <v03110704b9de8eadbe26@[192.168.1.5]> In-Reply-To: <3DB86F03.5040804_at_xmission.com> References: <20021024102759.3FB34157AC_at_karmail.ethz.ch> <v03110701b9dddbf4bfe0@[192.168.1.5]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 23:08:30 -0700 To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch From: Bill Frantz <frantz_at_pwpconsult.com> Subject: Re: Other Definitions - Raw vs Field 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
At 3:06 PM -0700 10/24/02, P A Hill & E V Goodall wrote:
>... but I can't think of any other way to say it.
>"field" is in "exactly" the form you collected it including photo copies
>and computer representations there of. While "raw" is the text version
>that is the start of any processing.
I mostly agree with this, but a nagging thought says that sometimes you
have to go back to the original book, because the photocopy isn't good
enough. The monochrome image can cause dirt to look like pencil, extra
contrast can obscure pat of the image, and in total desperation, you can't
perform chemical tests to decide what is pencil and what is dirt. (I
haven't heard of anyone actually doing the latter. Most people go back to
the cave to check the data when they get that desperate.)
This nagging thought is why I hope that the data transferred from
instruments that record in the field will be transferred with enough data
integrity checking that we can say the copy that is in our computer is
EXACTLY what was in the instrument.
Good Caving - Bill
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz | The principal effect of| Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506 | DMCA/SDMI is to prevent| 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz_at_pwpconsult.com | fair use. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 23:00:00 CET