[Therion] 2 Map-connection issue - Going to four levels - Offset tests SAMD-ITF-IS example

[Bruce Mutton]

Thanks Martin

So we now have confirmation of the same inconsistent map-connection
behaviour, relative to offset level, across three different ways of managing
surveys and maps:

*	Separate surveys and maps (Martin's example, Therion best practice)
*	Maps defined in surveys (My example from 2022, TopParser, Sexy Topo
approach)
*	Maps defined separate to surveys, but then included in next-level
surveys (My usual practice)

 

Suggests to me that the inconsistent map-connection behaviour is not related
to how surveys and maps are managed, but is rather a built-in characteristic
of Therion behaviour.

Tarquin mentioned that he could not replicate this inconsistent behaviour.
Now that we have teased out the problem some more, can you confirm that you
were testing the same issue Tarquin?

 

Bruce

 

From: Therion <therion-bounces at speleo.sk> On Behalf Of Martin Sluka via
Therion
Sent: Friday, 24 March 2023 08:28
To: List for Therion users <therion at speleo.sk>
Cc: Martin Sluka <martinsluka at mac.com>
Subject: Re: [Therion] 2 Map-connection issue - Going to four levels -
Offset tests SAMD-ITF-IS example

 

 

23. 3. 2023 v 20:13, Bruce Mutton <bruce at tomo.co.nz
<mailto:bruce at tomo.co.nz> >:

 

One more question.

I presume you have strict separation of surveys and maps in this dataset, as
demonstrated here
<https://therion.speleo.sk/wiki/faq#how_to_arrange_the_maps>
https://therion.speleo.sk/wiki/faq#how_to_arrange_the_maps and
<https://therion.speleo.sk/wiki/s_m> https://therion.speleo.sk/wiki/s_m ?

 

 

I use it as preferred method. 

 

Martin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.speleo.sk/pipermail/therion/attachments/20230324/618a1a0e/attachment.htm>