A valid data format that Survex doesn't accommodate?

[Andrew Atkinson]

On 24 Aug 2016 3:17 am, "Olly Betts" <olly at survex.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:08:08PM +0100, Andrew Atkinson wrote:
> > At one of the many Eurospeleo survey meetings, people raised the survey
> > method of taking 2 sets (not always full) of instruments which generally
> > were used for forward and back sights. However, not always; they could
be
> > swapped or both read the same way.
> > We could not think of a way to currently input this, especially while
> > keeping track of the instruments. Maybe there is a way, but if there is
not
> > what about (I can then open a ticket....)
>
> You should be able to put the second set in as "backcompass",
> "backclino", and "backtape" ("backtape" was added in 1.2.25, if you want
> to be able to omit one of "tape" or "backtape" you need 1.2.27).  You
> just need to calibrate them so they actually work as a second forwards
> set - for example, if there's no actual calibration for the second set
> of instruments then this should work I think:
>
> *calibrate backcompass 180
> *calibrate backclino 0 -1
>
> The backsight support allows you to omit one or other of the pairs of
> readings, and for the instruments to be calibrated differently, use
> different units, or even for one of the clinos to read in %.

That does not really cover this case, or would be tedious to type in. Every
time you change direction with an instrument (using a forward instrument
backward or backwards instrument forward) the *calibration would need to be
changed. So yes technically it can be implemented in Survex, but not
really. I would suggest this format is needed to allow users to put data in
as the collect it without a hack/bodge.
>
> Did you already ask me about this on the CUCC expo?  I'm fairly sure I
> suggested this to someone recently!

I did not ask you on expo, only came across it at Eurospeleo
>
> Cheers,
>     Olly