Stacho, are you not able to generate "virtual" survey just from the stations included in selected maps? Any link between maps and surveys could be quite dangerous, because one maps could be part of for example three surveys or only very small part of survey. m. On 17.11.2010, at 22:39, Stacho Mudrak wrote:
Well, as you have noticed, map selection and survey selection are completely independent - even map selections are independent between projections. With exception of maps, everywhere else survey selection is used.
Do you have some idea, how to solve this discrepancy? Normally, just survey selection could be enough. But then there need to be specified the map - that need to be shown, when this survey is selected (link survey - map). But then you will loose a possibility to export all scraps from given survey if some of them will not be included in that map.
Or the other way - discrepancy between lengths in 2D and 3D could be solved by adding a link from map to survey. Which way would you prefer? For me, probably the second one is better. If there will be link from map to survey - than this survey could be selected, when a map is selected and length/depth from this survey could be taken into account.
Best regards, S.
On 17 November 2010 09:26, Bruce <dangle@tomo.co.nz> wrote:
OK, I tried it. Selected a map containing a few caves, and a single survey, a small part of one of those caves in one of my datasets. The 2d pdf map produced a cave and reported 12km and the lists and 3d model in the same thconfig run reported a single survey of 45m.
I see now it has always been this way, but was not what I had assumed for all these years. (One can never read the Therion book too carefully).
It also explains the discrepancy in reported cave lengths between 2d pdf maps and the list outputs. If there are no scraps for a short length of survey, then the 2d pdf map does not report that portion of the cave length.
This means that, assuming the surveys and maps are decoupled as is one of the supposed advantages of Therion (and I agree it is), it is therefore NOT usually possible to get a comprehensive set of outputs (2d pdfs, 3d models, lists of caves, continuations and surveys) that relate to a particular discrete SUBset of data (It is however possible to get these for the ENTIRE dataset at any level, but if the global effect of loop closures is to be accounted for at a lower level the outputs are unlikely to represent a consistent portion of the cave-unless map objects and surveys join at the same places).
I agree Andrew, it would be good to select a map object and have all types of output refer to drawings and centrelines contained in that map object. It is the behaviour I was incorrectly assuming, and the inevitable discrepancies I had been putting down to bugs either in Therion or my haphazard data organisation. The reverse currently happens when a survey is selected I think. Ie all scraps are exported for selected surveys. This does not allow passage previews and offsets though.
Martin, Stacho, Should/could Therion produce such synchronised outputs where maps are selected, or should the users have to make the boundaries of their map objects match survey junctions at key locations to enable them to get consistency between map based outputs and survey based outputs? The later, status quo, is workable, but seems to make it difficult for the user and make interpretation of output statistics quite onerous.
So if I were to suggest a specific change it would be that when maps are selected, only data relating to survey legs contained within selected maps would be exported.
Or am I missing something? Comments?
Regards Bruce
-----Original Message----- From: therion-bounces@speleo.sk [mailto:therion-bounces@speleo.sk] On Behalf Of Andrew Atkinson Sent: Wednesday, 17 November 2010 6:56 a.m.
Your suggested solution, is what I do, for 3d, and it works, but I have not used lists yet. However, it would be nice to be able to select a map and only get a centreline with this would be good, but I suspect too much work for it to be worth while. (plus lots of decisions about what exactly would appear in the output
Andrew
On 16/11/10 09:08, Bruce wrote:
My reading of the Therion Book suggests to me;
- that 'source' specifies the files that Therion should read and process before deciding what to export. The source files should contain or reference surveys and or a surface.
- that 'select' chooses which survey(s) and or map(s) from the above files to export. If there is no 'select' statement then 'all' are exported.
My interpretation #1 is that this should allow all the surveys of a large (or modest) system of cave passages to be referenced by way of 'source' so that all the survey loop and scrap join distortions can be processed BEFORE Therion decides what to export. This is what seems to occur. So far, so good.
My interpretation #2 is that when a map or maps for any particular projection is 'selected' then ONLY the data that relates to those maps should be exported. This is what seems to happen for Map outputs (pdf and ?kml) and Atlas outputs.
I have some difficulty and confusion with outputs that don't have a projection, such as the lists, 3d outputs and database. What seems to happen is that regardless of the 'selected' maps, all of the 'sourced' data is exported to this type of output.
What I would like is that only the data related to the 'selected' maps are exported. This way all subset outputs can be consistent (same loop closure distortions applied), and separately exported.
In writing this out I suspect I may have realised the answer to my question (but not yet tested it). Perhaps what I need to do is 'select' survey(s) that encompass the same part of the cave as the maps?
Any insights or clarifications gratefully received.
Bruce
_______________________________________________ Therion mailing list Therion@speleo.sk http://mailman.speleo.sk/mailman/listinfo/therion
_______________________________________________ Therion mailing list Therion@speleo.sk http://mailman.speleo.sk/mailman/listinfo/therion