are dedicated fields in the template.svx file for this purpose, but there has been laxness recently on filling them in.
It seems to be an unknown resource among too many expo-goers despite the manifold benefits.
<h3>Why do we want to do this?</h3>
<p>
We need to store Question Marks (QMs) and cave description data in an easy-to-use format for setting objectives and
planning trips.
<p>When planning an expo, it is necessary to work out where leads are in each cave before
arriving in Austria to make effective use of time and equipment. The most readily
accessible place for such information is in .svx files, because this is more efficient
compared to including QMs only in survey drawings in Tunnel or writing a cave
description then putting it on the expo website.
<p>Svx files are a very stable place to store the data long-
term: there is no need to rely on a ‘master file’ of any kind, which can be problematic if not everyone
on expo has the same level of computer literacy, and requires just basic text entry to create and update
the data after a trip.
<h3>How it’s done:</h3>
<p>
So, you’ve got your .svx file started (if entering new data), or located and opened (if updating a
previously surveyed bit of cave after checking out some QMs again), and it looks a bit like this (visual
format will change depending on your preferred text editor):
<p>
<imgsrc="wob-svx-edit-pic.jpg"width=900>
<p>
If you don’t understand what is in front of you here, then you need to read the <ahref="newcave.html#survexformat">survey handbook guide on svx files</a> which will lead you to the survex documentation, or ask
someone about basic entry of survey leg and station data into the .svx file format.
<p>
Near to the end of the text in the file, you will see a section that looks like this:
<p>
<imgsrc="wob-svx-edit-pic2.jpg"width=900>
<p>
This is where the action is! You literally just follow the instructions in the file to create QM and cave
description data, replacing the template text with your own as you would with the cave passage data.
<pstyle="margin:4%">
<em>Technical Note:</em> The syntax for a QM includes a leading semi-colon. So it is syntactically a "comment" so far as the survex software is concerned. But we have other software and scripts in the Expo online system which inderstand just fine that these are QMs.
<p>
Here is an example from the last bit of bipedalpassage.svx in 264. Note that each QM description is all on one line.
<pre><code>;-----------
;Question Mark List ;(leave commented-out)
<em>;Serial number grade(A/B/C/X) nearest-station resolution-station description</em>
;QM1 A bipedalpassage.1 - Very good. 50m+ (?) deep pit below start of 13 bolt bipedal traverse - rather slanted, large ongoing rift glimpsed below. very good.
;QM2 A bipedalpassage.3 - Very good. 50m+ (?) deep pit below end of 13 bolt bipedal traverse. best approched via station 4 (?) and looks ok to rig. May connect to first deep pit.
;QM3 C bipedalpassage.1 - Poor c lead, across thin rock bridge over abyss (!) leads to blind aven, but small tube for thin person on left.
;QM4 A bipedalpassage.10 - Good. Ongoing big phreatic passage forms pitch dropped in Bipedal Passage4 by Ben, then continued by Mike and Elain on Aug 6th.
;QM5 C bipedalpassage.9 - Speculative - climb up needs short 5-10m rope - could be tube in roof.
;QM6 C bipedalpassage.31 - Very good location where main phreatic passages and enlarges - but far side of chamber choked. One part of choke was not accessed as needs 2m climb up to poke nose in it. A good free climber could do this or needs one bolt to be sure no way on. Very strong draft in choke! Interesting southerly trend at margin of known system
If these data are not entered along with the rest of the survey data, it is as if you decided not to enter
some of the actual passage data you surveyed: information is being lost and someone will have to
trawl back through all the survey data at a later time to keep it up-to-date, a very tedious task which
is a very inefficient use of time.
<p>Also if the person reading it hasn’t been to the bit of cave (which is, like, <em>the whole point</em>, then the data has a higher chance of being incorrect. It is not always easy to interpret Tunnel or Therion
