Thanks Martin So we now have confirmation of the same inconsistent map-connection behaviour, relative to offset level, across three different ways of managing surveys and maps:
* Separate surveys and maps (Martin's example, Therion best practice) * Maps defined in surveys (My example from 2022, TopParser, Sexy Topo approach) * Maps defined separate to surveys, but then included in next-level surveys (My usual practice) Suggests to me that the inconsistent map-connection behaviour is not related to how surveys and maps are managed, but is rather a built-in characteristic of Therion behaviour. Tarquin mentioned that he could not replicate this inconsistent behaviour. Now that we have teased out the problem some more, can you confirm that you were testing the same issue Tarquin? Bruce From: Therion <therion-boun...@speleo.sk> On Behalf Of Martin Sluka via Therion Sent: Friday, 24 March 2023 08:28 To: List for Therion users <therion@speleo.sk> Cc: Martin Sluka <martinsl...@mac.com> Subject: Re: [Therion] 2 Map-connection issue - Going to four levels - Offset tests SAMD-ITF-IS example 23. 3. 2023 v 20:13, Bruce Mutton <br...@tomo.co.nz <mailto:br...@tomo.co.nz> >: One more question. I presume you have strict separation of surveys and maps in this dataset, as demonstrated here <https://therion.speleo.sk/wiki/faq#how_to_arrange_the_maps> https://therion.speleo.sk/wiki/faq#how_to_arrange_the_maps and <https://therion.speleo.sk/wiki/s_m> https://therion.speleo.sk/wiki/s_m ? I use it as preferred method. Martin
_______________________________________________ Therion mailing list Therion@speleo.sk https://mailman.speleo.sk/listinfo/therion
