Martin

You are right, and I do use the workflow that you describe.

However if one needs a very quick and very clear macro representation of how good the loop closures are, or if you want to compare projects.  Or if you inherit or need to debug someone else’s project, then the methods available in Therion are tedious.

Aven provides a very nice way to make these macro comparisons (once Therion can export the data).

Bruce

PS: I am thinking mainly of centrelines here, scraps are not so relevant.

From: Therion [mailto:therion-bounces@speleo.sk] On Behalf Of Martin Sluka via Therion
Sent: Friday, 24 February 2017 9:34 AM
To: List for Therion users <therion@speleo.sk>
Cc: Martin Sluka <martinsluka@mac.com>
Subject: Re: [Therion] Aven colour by loop error

On Feb 23, 2017, at 08:06 PM, Bruce Mutton via Therion <therion@speleo.sk> wrote:

Martin

The Therion debug feature is useful, but I would suggest that it is for micro interrogation of at most a few scraps at a time, and not for quickly identifying the macro loop error health of a project.

Typos like the one you describe would not be evident from scrap distortions, at least in my case, as (in the old days of manual surveying with compass and book) the scraps would be drawn using the erroneous data, so no distortion mismatch between centreline and scrap would be flagged by Therion.  Would only be found by the person drawing noticing that something looked out of proportion.

It is the question of your workflow.

I check each scrap individually, I check each map, each bigger map etc. I check it after each equate command (new loop closure), etc. I'm not sure if the best way is to start from huge system down to individual scraps.

Martin