XML and CES

[Tom Waser]

We are about to update to XML on our machines. In the interest of "safety"
and existing data integrity, I looked thru the forum here for posts on
backward compatibility, ie problems or issues using XML with Survcadd files
generated by CES or older versions. I didn't see anything, so I'm just
asking before we make the wholesale switch (several machines). Has anyone
run into any problems with using older Survcadd files in XML, or conversely,
using XML generated files with CES or older Survcadd installations? We are
using COGO, DTM, SCT and HYD modules only. No mining, GIS or Tsunami.
Thanks.

Tom Waser
Batson Himes Norvell & Poe
Knoxville, TN

[Dave C.]

Tom,

I actually have some machines that are still running CES, and a handful of
XML. We are working on the same projects with no problems so far. I plan
to get them all on XML, just haven't had the time. I haven't seen anyone
post a problem with compatibility. There are a couple of patches for XML
that you will want to download though. (minor fixes).


"Tom Waser" <taw@norvellpoe.com> wrote in message
news:amsf9k$3hb$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

We are about to update to XML on our machines. In the interest of "safety"
and existing data integrity, I looked thru the forum here for posts on
backward compatibility, ie problems or issues using XML with Survcadd
files
generated by CES or older versions. I didn't see anything, so I'm just
asking before we make the wholesale switch (several machines). Has anyone
run into any problems with using older Survcadd files in XML, or
conversely,
using XML generated files with CES or older Survcadd installations? We
are
using COGO, DTM, SCT and HYD modules only. No mining, GIS or Tsunami.
Thanks.

Tom Waser
Batson Himes Norvell & Poe
Knoxville, TN

[Harley C. Pawley, PLS]

Please see my warning RE: Field to Finish above, because XML does change the
..fld files and they become useless to CES. Currently, I have both versions
on my workstation because I'm still using the demo mode for XML due to
license problems that are being worked out.

Also, I have found what appear to be problems, or differences, with the 2
versions on how they process raw data files, and that issue is being looked
at.

"Dave C." <dcc@geosurv.com> wrote in message
news:amshur$4fp$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

Tom,

I actually have some machines that are still running CES, and a handful of
XML. We are working on the same projects with no problems so far. I plan
to get them all on XML, just haven't had the time. I haven't seen anyone
post a problem with compatibility. There are a couple of patches for XML
that you will want to download though. (minor fixes).


"Tom Waser" <taw@norvellpoe.com> wrote in message
news:amsf9k$3hb$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
We are about to update to XML on our machines. In the interest of
"safety"
and existing data integrity, I looked thru the forum here for posts on
backward compatibility, ie problems or issues using XML with Survcadd
files
generated by CES or older versions. I didn't see anything, so I'm just
asking before we make the wholesale switch (several machines). Has
anyone
run into any problems with using older Survcadd files in XML, or
conversely,
using XML generated files with CES or older Survcadd installations? We
are
using COGO, DTM, SCT and HYD modules only. No mining, GIS or Tsunami.
Thanks.

Tom Waser
Batson Himes Norvell & Poe
Knoxville, TN

[Barkley Hensley, P.L.S.]

Harley, I am running different fld files made in Carlson Survey, Field
Survey, SurvCADD CES for Acad 14 and Acad 2k2, SurvCADD XML for Acad 14 and
Acad Map5 as well as Tsunami and have no problem with going from one program
to another with any of the files. Now I may be missing something because
currently I can't find your original post concerning this matter. Let me
know if you are still having trouble. I don't think it to be a compatiablity
issue between CES and XML.

Barkley

"Harley C. Pawley, PLS" <hcp@coredesigninc.com> wrote in message
news:amsj90$4tb$2@update.carlsonsw.com...

Please see my warning RE: Field to Finish above, because XML does change
the
.fld files and they become useless to CES. Currently, I have both
versions
on my workstation because I'm still using the demo mode for XML due to
license problems that are being worked out.

Also, I have found what appear to be problems, or differences, with the 2
versions on how they process raw data files, and that issue is being
looked
at.

"Dave C." <dcc@geosurv.com> wrote in message
news:amshur$4fp$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
Tom,

I actually have some machines that are still running CES, and a handful
of
XML. We are working on the same projects with no problems so far. I
plan
to get them all on XML, just haven't had the time. I haven't seen
anyone
post a problem with compatibility. There are a couple of patches for
XML
that you will want to download though. (minor fixes).


"Tom Waser" <taw@norvellpoe.com> wrote in message
news:amsf9k$3hb$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
We are about to update to XML on our machines. In the interest of
"safety"
and existing data integrity, I looked thru the forum here for posts on
backward compatibility, ie problems or issues using XML with Survcadd
files
generated by CES or older versions. I didn't see anything, so I'm just
asking before we make the wholesale switch (several machines). Has
anyone
run into any problems with using older Survcadd files in XML, or
conversely,
using XML generated files with CES or older Survcadd installations?
We
are
using COGO, DTM, SCT and HYD modules only. No mining, GIS or Tsunami.
Thanks.

Tom Waser
Batson Himes Norvell & Poe
Knoxville, TN

[Harley C. Pawley, PLS]

Thanks, Barkley for spending time on this. I have to apologize for not
being more specific when I sent the raw file to you. The problem lies in
lines 429-432 in the XML version vs. line 437 of the CES version. I will be
faxing Process results to you momentarily showing Traverse Point #12 being
calculated incorrectly by XML due to the processing of the repetitive angles
vs. the mean data in CES. Please send this on to figure it out or let me
know what I'm doing wrong. Also, RE: the Process Results reports, why does
CES list all the points (I deleted all the topo shots before I printed) and
the XML lists none?

You mentioned downloading the CR5 from the TDS Rangers...we don't do that
right now. Here is our normal process - could you critique it for us and let
us know if we should revise our process?

1. Drawing files and data files stored on server on separate drives so that
our Engineering/Drafting dept's can't corrupt our data.
2. Every morning CR5 files are created for the jobs needed for the field
that day. These are sent to the Rangers.
3. The crews import the CR5 files into their TDS job files. They then save
all staked/topo data in the RW5 files.
4. The crews download the RW5 files onto the office server at the end of
the day and renames it with the job, date, and .RAW extension.
5 The office then processes the RAW files, quite often revising the file
before processing to not overwrite any control points used.

Thanks for your input, and I'll wait to hear from you RE: the RAW file
discrepancy. Call or email if you have any questions.

Harley C. Pawley, P.L.S.
Core Design, Inc.
425-885-7877
425-885-7963 Fax

"Barkley Hensley, P.L.S." <bhensley@carlsonsw.com> wrote in message
news:amv38b$olh$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

Harley, after further discussion and inspection, we think you are on to
something. I do have some trouble when attempting to use a fld file made
in
xml with ces. I will report this and follow up on it to see when
something
can be done to rectify the problem. Thanks for the report.



"Barkley Hensley, P.L.S." <bhensley@carlsonsw.com> wrote in message
news:amuruu$mfb$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
Harley, I am running different fld files made in Carlson Survey, Field
Survey, SurvCADD CES for Acad 14 and Acad 2k2, SurvCADD XML for Acad 14
and
Acad Map5 as well as Tsunami and have no problem with going from one
program
to another with any of the files. Now I may be missing something because
currently I can't find your original post concerning this matter. Let me
know if you are still having trouble. I don't think it to be a
compatiablity
issue between CES and XML.

Barkley

"Harley C. Pawley, PLS" <hcp@coredesigninc.com> wrote in message
news:amsj90$4tb$2@update.carlsonsw.com...
Please see my warning RE: Field to Finish above, because XML does
change
the
.fld files and they become useless to CES. Currently, I have both
versions
on my workstation because I'm still using the demo mode for XML due to
license problems that are being worked out.

Also, I have found what appear to be problems, or differences, with
the
2
versions on how they process raw data files, and that issue is being
looked
at.

"Dave C." <dcc@geosurv.com> wrote in message
news:amshur$4fp$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
Tom,

I actually have some machines that are still running CES, and a
handful
of
XML. We are working on the same projects with no problems so far.
I
plan
to get them all on XML, just haven't had the time. I haven't seen
anyone
post a problem with compatibility. There are a couple of patches
for
XML
that you will want to download though. (minor fixes).


"Tom Waser" <taw@norvellpoe.com> wrote in message
news:amsf9k$3hb$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
We are about to update to XML on our machines. In the interest of
"safety"
and existing data integrity, I looked thru the forum here for
posts
on
backward compatibility, ie problems or issues using XML with
Survcadd
files
generated by CES or older versions. I didn't see anything, so I'm
just
asking before we make the wholesale switch (several machines). Has
anyone
run into any problems with using older Survcadd files in XML, or
conversely,
using XML generated files with CES or older Survcadd
installations?
We
are
using COGO, DTM, SCT and HYD modules only. No mining, GIS or
Tsunami.
Thanks.

Tom Waser
Batson Himes Norvell & Poe
Knoxville, TN

[Barkley Hensley, P.L.S.]

Harley, after further discussion and inspection, we think you are on to
something. I do have some trouble when attempting to use a fld file made in
xml with ces. I will report this and follow up on it to see when something
can be done to rectify the problem. Thanks for the report.



"Barkley Hensley, P.L.S." <bhensley@carlsonsw.com> wrote in message
news:amuruu$mfb$1@update.carlsonsw.com...

Harley, I am running different fld files made in Carlson Survey, Field
Survey, SurvCADD CES for Acad 14 and Acad 2k2, SurvCADD XML for Acad 14
and
Acad Map5 as well as Tsunami and have no problem with going from one
program
to another with any of the files. Now I may be missing something because
currently I can't find your original post concerning this matter. Let me
know if you are still having trouble. I don't think it to be a
compatiablity
issue between CES and XML.

Barkley

"Harley C. Pawley, PLS" <hcp@coredesigninc.com> wrote in message
news:amsj90$4tb$2@update.carlsonsw.com...
Please see my warning RE: Field to Finish above, because XML does change
the
.fld files and they become useless to CES. Currently, I have both
versions
on my workstation because I'm still using the demo mode for XML due to
license problems that are being worked out.

Also, I have found what appear to be problems, or differences, with the
2
versions on how they process raw data files, and that issue is being
looked
at.

"Dave C." <dcc@geosurv.com> wrote in message
news:amshur$4fp$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
Tom,

I actually have some machines that are still running CES, and a
handful
of
XML. We are working on the same projects with no problems so far. I
plan
to get them all on XML, just haven't had the time. I haven't seen
anyone
post a problem with compatibility. There are a couple of patches for
XML
that you will want to download though. (minor fixes).


"Tom Waser" <taw@norvellpoe.com> wrote in message
news:amsf9k$3hb$1@update.carlsonsw.com...
We are about to update to XML on our machines. In the interest of
"safety"
and existing data integrity, I looked thru the forum here for posts
on
backward compatibility, ie problems or issues using XML with
Survcadd
files
generated by CES or older versions. I didn't see anything, so I'm
just
asking before we make the wholesale switch (several machines). Has
anyone
run into any problems with using older Survcadd files in XML, or
conversely,
using XML generated files with CES or older Survcadd installations?
We
are
using COGO, DTM, SCT and HYD modules only. No mining, GIS or
Tsunami.
Thanks.

Tom Waser
Batson Himes Norvell & Poe
Knoxville, TN