Unfortunately, there is no such option implemented yet, but it looks like a simple feature to implement, so I will try.
Thanks, S. On 19 October 2011 20:14, Bruce <bruce at tomo.co.nz> wrote: > One of my âto doâ list projects has been to figure out a was of organising > map objects so that it is easy to create map and atlas outputs either with > or without map offsets.  I want to use the same map definitions in both > cases to avoid lots of duplication = lots more room for error. > > > > Why? Because multilevel cave maps at say 1:200 to 1:2000 scales are more > useful/legible with offsets, and at say 1:5000 to 1:10000 are more useful > without offsets (eg locality maps with offsets built in are misleading). >  Atlas outputs, I have decided, should never have offsets, because the whole > point of a multilevel (multi-chapter?) atlas is to show the passage in itâs > true relationship and the offsets seem to scramble the chapter structure (or > I have been doing something wrong). > > > > The strategy I was thinking of was finding a cunning map object structure > that allowed a fairly easy toggle between the two options, but my loose > conclusion is that for a complicated multilayer cave it will usually involve > the commenting and uncomenting of many lines of map definitions, possibly in > a number of locations, and some layout data block changes. This makes it > difficult if you have not used that particular dataset for a while. > > > > An example of the sort of thing that is required is changing; > >  PR-PigletsJiltedPlan at MiddleEarth [0 100 m] above > > to; > >  PR-PigletsJiltedPlan at MiddleEarth # [0 100 m] above > > > > A much simpler concept would be to have a simple layout command like; > >  Ignore offsets > > that might be valid for both map outputs and atlas outputs. > > > > ie, if âignore offsetsâ is processed anywhere in the thconfig scope, then > no > offsets are produced.  If it is not, then the offsets are produced as > defined.  Simple (for the users) â only one character change (#) in one > place. > > > > Is this concept already implemented and I have not managed to find it? > > Or if not, could it be implemented (easily)? > > > > Bruce > > _______________________________________________ > Therion mailing list > Therion at speleo.sk > http://mailman.speleo.sk/mailman/listinfo/therion > >
