On 25 May, 2018 - Jef Driesen wrote: > On 25-05-18 16:35, Willem Ferguson wrote: > >On 25/05/2018 15:55, Jef Driesen wrote: > >>The main disadvantage is that you'll no longer know which type of ppO2 > >>(sensor or voted/average) you are getting. Especially if you only have > >>one sensor. > > > >I would agree, but at least one gets the calculated pO2 as perceived by > >the machine at the time, even though there is no idea about sensor > >problems during the dive. It is so much better than having no pO2 data > >to evaluate after a dive. This pO2 would still correspond to the data > >in the pO2 graph of the Shearwater Desktop software. > > > >I do not quite get the argument about one sensor? For one sensor there > >is no averaging or voting?? I'm not seeing something, so please spell it > >out? > > The average ppO2 is always a single value. But there is often more > than one sensor. So you could assume that if you get more than one > ppO2 value that they are values from a sensor. But in the case of a > single sensor, that doesn't work, and you won't be able to tell > which value you got. > > I'm not sure if the average ppO2 is always equal to the sensor ppO2 > for the single sensor case. Maybe the dive computer does averaging > over several measurements to ignore outliers? (Is simply don't > know.)
Any way, its better that we get A value, than no value. It would be dead simple to emit a SAMPLE_EVENT_STRING, or a DC_FIELD_STRING just saying, "hey, these are not the raw ppO2 values you where looking for, but the next best thing", if you would have taken those patches. //Anton -- Anton Lundin +46702-161604 _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface