Watch the overview
79 seconds. A narrated explainer; the transcript is below. The written guide includes additional detail.
Read the video text
- 0:00An alignment report can look quiet because
- 0:02the necessary reference is missing. Start with
- 0:05what was actually available, not just the
- 0:08number of findings. For our demonstration project,
- 0:11imagine a network register and survey file
- 0:14are present, but lane references and road
- 0:16geometry are absent. Some relationships can be
- 0:19examined; others cannot. Keep aligned, warnings, errors
- 0:24and not checked distinct. A missing prerequisite
- 0:27must not turn into a successful engineering
- 0:30result, and a partial run must not
- 0:32imply complete coverage. Read the reason attached
- 0:35to the check family. Lane comparison needs
- 0:38an applicable lane reference; spatial offset needs
- 0:41usable geometry for the relevant road. A
- 0:44file being uploaded does not prove either
- 0:46dependency is usable. The selected schema, available
- 0:50fields, reference versions and implemented checks define
- 0:54the evidence scope. Certification records a review
- 0:57decision and file fingerprint; it does not
- 1:00create missing engineering evidence. When references change,
- 1:04run the relevant analysis again and review
- 1:06the new results. Keep the original scope
- 1:09and the later result traceable. That is
- 1:12how a partial check becomes an informed
- 1:14review.
No finding is not full coverage
An alignment report can look quiet because the necessary reference is missing. Start with what was actually available, not just the number of findings.
For our demonstration project, imagine a network register and survey file are present, but lane references and road geometry are absent. Some relationships can be examined; others cannot.
Separate the outcomes
Keep aligned, warnings, errors and not checked distinct. A missing prerequisite must not turn into a successful engineering result, and a partial run must not imply complete coverage.
Read the reason attached to the check family. Lane comparison needs an applicable lane reference; spatial offset needs usable geometry for the relevant road. A file being uploaded does not prove either dependency is usable.
Keep an extent estimate separate from acceptance
A fictional network can contain four of five 2 km sections with records while one of those sections still has an error. The presence of 8 km of data therefore does not mean 8 km passed every check. Likewise, a min-to-max extent can span an internal gap that contains no observations.
Read the report’s inclusion limits, reference version and unavailable checks before using its totals. Do not add overlapping extents from different survey types to claim unique project kilometres. Keep unresolved findings and excluded files visible in the handover narrative.
Review the evidence scope
The selected schema, available fields, reference versions and implemented checks define the evidence scope. Certification records a review decision and file fingerprint; it does not create missing engineering evidence.
When references change, run the relevant analysis again and review the new results. Keep the original scope and the later result traceable. That is how a partial check becomes an informed review.
Sources and scope
This guide describes the platform workflow; it does not establish a requirement of a TMH manual. Platform review and certification are described in the product documentation.
Put it into practice
Review check templatesSign-in and the relevant account permissions are required.