If you don't understand what is in front of you here, then you need to read the <ahref="newsurvex.html">survey handbook guide on svx files</a> which will lead you to the survex documentation, or ask
;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
<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 drawings correctly
with this sort of thing.
<h4id="tick">Ticking off a QM</h4>
<p>Since 2015 we have had no generally-agreed, well-documented or widely-practiced way of recording whether a QM has been ticked-off or not.
<p>In the past, this was done by
<ol>
<li>surveying into the passage beyond the QM,
<li>creating a new survex file for that survey,
and then
<li>editing the original survex file using the name of one of those new survey stations as the "resolution-station", replacing the "-" previously there.
</ol>This meant that a QM
could only be ticked-off if there was, in fact, surveyable passage beyond it, and if it was worth surveying, and if
someone did so.
<p>In 2022 we had a proposal to add an extra line to the original survex file, now that survex files can be edited
easily on-line (and the version control happens invisibly and automatically):
<code>
QM<em>nn</em> TICK <em>date comment</em>
</code>
e.g.<code>
QM15 TICK 2022-07-20 This is a dummy ticked QM</code>
in <ahref="/survexfile/caves-1623/258/flashhard2.svx">258/flashhard2.svx</a>. <br>
The TICKed QM appears at the end of the report <ahref="/cave/qms/1623-258">/cave/qms/1623-258</a> at the bottom of the page.</p>
<p>The <var>date</var> field is sufficient to tie the tick-off event to one of a small number of logbook entries and survex files, which is where the actual exploration would be documented. If it was a rapid dead-end, or if later parties can't find it at all, then there should be just a logbook entry.
