> 15. 11. 2019 v 14:33, Bill Gee <b...@campercaver.net>: > > Regarding the strange offsets of [0 0 ft] - That is intentional. If I did > not do the offset with "above" or "below", then the transparency effects did > not work. It was not clear which passage was above or below. They were all > mashed together as if they were one layer. A true offset was not, in my > judgement, necessary.
There is a way you may use to organize layers of maps with above and below: map layer_3.map -projection plan -title "Radavc - layer 3“ ... radavc_2012_w_plan_s2d preview above layer_1.map preview above layer_2.map preview below layer_4.map preview below layer_5.map preview below layer_6.map endmap map layer_4.map -projection plan -title "Radavc - layer 4“ …. It means that you define what is relative position of a map definition to another maps which create an overall map. > And one last question, just because I am curious: Does the naming > convention of "name@place" extend to more than one layer? Is something like > "name@cave@space" possible? Could I write something like > "AllieMainPlan@AllieSpringCave@BCRPlanMap"? There is another syntax, but it works only for surveys/name spaces: AllieMainPlan@AllieSpringCave.BCRPlanMap.x.y etc. object@name_space.higher_name_space.higher_name_space Martin
_______________________________________________ Therion mailing list Therion@speleo.sk https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion
