Interactive Extended Elevations

[Footleg]

>>> You also want to be able to specify that certain legs should be omitted
>>
>>It may be a lot more sensible for the file describing the extended
elevation
>>to list *all* those survey legs which are to be *included*.
>
>I'm not sure I agree.  If you update the survey you're likely to want the
>new legs to appear in the extended elevation by default, which points to
>listing excluded legs or traverses in the fold file.  Also there are likely
>to be far fewer legs excluded than included which means listing excluded
>ones would be more compact and quicker to process.
>
>>This makes it a
>>lot clearer for the human user coming along to edit it, given that these
>>directives are in a separate file from the original survey data.
>
>I'm not sure it would be any clearer - besides the intention is that most
>people would use the graphical editor anyhow.
>
>Cheers,
>Olly

Looks like it would make sense to allow a flag in the file containing the
list of legs to say whether they are to be excluded or included. The
graphical editor can be made to deal with this without the user having to
know anything about it. It will however give the extra flexibility to the
users who want to edit the file manually.

Footleg