[Expo-tech] glitch in p2018-ad-01 - is it 1623 or 1626 ?

[Philip Sargent (Gmail)]

Thanks Wookey,

 

So these 3 files need editing to remove the mistaken location in 1626 ?

 

:loser:/kataster/1626.svx:

*export p2018-ad-01

:loser:/kataster/1626-no-schoenberg-hs.svx:

*export p2018-ad-01

:loser:/gpx/2018/ additional_info.svx

*equate waypoints_aday-2018-07-11.2018_ad_01 1626.p2018-ad-01

*entrance 1626.p2018-ad-01

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Expo-tech [mailto:expo-tech-bounces at lists.wookware.org] On Behalf Of Wookey
Sent: 30 June 2020 13:46
To: expo-tech at lists.wookware.org
Subject: Re: [Expo-tech] glitch in p2018-ad-01 - is it 1623 or 1626 ?

 

On 2020-06-30 13:16 +0100, Philip Sargent (Gmail) wrote:

>    cavern says:

> 

>    …/loser/kataster/1623.svx:7: warning: Station “1623.p2018-ad-01” referred

>    to by *entrance or *export but never used

> 

>     

> 

>    I according to /caves/ it is in 1623:

> 

>    http://expo.survex.com/1623/2018-ad-01

> 

>    and from the GPS in essentials.gpx it is probably in 1623, but overlooking

>    the Wildensee hutte so might be in 1626.

 

It's 572m inside 1623 according to the dataset I just looked at. Not

even close to being debateable. The border is in the dataset so it's

very easy to tell which side of the line things are. Look in aven.

 

>    And how do we resolve this without breaking lots of things ?

 

Resolve the cavern warning?

 

Well there is no underground data for 2018-ad-01 so there is an no

underground data connected to it. And there are two surface GPS tracks

going there, but the entrance has been positioned in the middle of the

'GPS wander' rather than at any specific point (which seems reasonably

correct) so it's not connected to any actual dataset. Hence the

warning. So nothing is 'wrong' here.

 

It presumably doesn't also have a REFERENCE modifier which I think

would supress the warning. This relates to the general treatment of

entrance locations, which should correctly be derived from a number of

inputs (surface surveys, bearings, multiple GPS readings, images, and

DEMs and for altitude). Survex could do this (apart from the

image-location - that needs to be extracted in another process), but

currently has rather too simple a data model, resulting in warnings

like this where someone has clearly done the averaging job

manually/externally. We are working on a better process as part of the

'how do we interface with GIS' discussions.

 

>    But so far as I can see, the GPS position is *only* in essentials.gpx and

>    not in any of the cave or entrance data. Presumably connected by a surface

>    survey to a fixed point but I haven’t deciphered that.

 

It's clearly been derived from GPS tracks.

 

A lot of this entrance info needs a good checking over as I'm pretty

sure there is all sorts of nonsense in there. But more usefully we

should work out how to enter the actual data we have such that a

consistent location can be calculated from the available data, rather

than arbitrarily annointing one GPS reading which is currently what

happens a lot.

 

Wookey

-- 

Principal hats:  Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM

http://wookware.org/

 

_______________________________________________

Expo-tech mailing list

Expo-tech at lists.wookware.org

https://lists.wookware.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/expo-tech

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wookware.org/pipermail/expo-tech/attachments/20200630/c0cdd7de/attachment-0001.htm>