Know what your checks cover.
Identify the manual edition, the file family and the selected template before interpreting a result. These are different things: a published requirement, a software configuration and evidence that a check actually ran.
Updated . The receiving authority determines the edition and project requirements to apply. Current editorial references below retain their published draft status; they are not a declaration of adoption by every authority.
COTO TMH-18 — Road Asset Data Electronic Exchange Formats
Source edition: Committee Draft 5.0, February 2016. Read the publisher’s PDF.
Source locators: §1.1 record format; §1.6 Table 5 file families; §2 network and geometry; §5 condition data; §5.7.1 and Appendix A raw F25.
| Relevant files or work | Network (.net), classification (.rcl), lanes (.lan), traffic (.adt), visual condition (.flx, .con, .blc, .vgi), combined instrument (.cid), deflection (.fwd) and raw F25 (.f25). Legacy visual extensions are also accepted with the matching legacy template. |
|---|---|
| Platform scope | Selected template-driven structural checks and applicable data-quality checks. Project alignment can compare files with the available network, classification, lane and geometry references. Inspect the current template and result to establish what ran. |
| What this does not establish | An accepted extension, a seeded template or a green result is not evidence of complete Committee Draft 5.0 coverage. A check may be skipped when its required input is unavailable. Preserve the receiving authority’s adopted edition and profile. |
COTO TMH-14 — South African Standard Traffic Data Collection Format
Source edition: Committee Draft, Format Version 3.20, 4 April 2018. Read the publisher’s PDF.
Source locators: §2.3 file structure; §2.4 comma-delimited representation; Chapter 8 header records; Chapter 11 summary records.
| Relevant files or work | RSV and RSS traffic files, with mixed-record and record-level templates. Record identifiers and the active header context determine how traffic records are interpreted. |
|---|---|
| Platform scope | A TMH-14 parser, catalogue and selected structural/data-quality checks, including header-block and record dependencies. Select the traffic template that matches the file; this is a separate parser path from TMH-18 tabular records. |
| What this does not establish | File checking does not verify traffic-counter calibration, site installation or the truth of vehicle observations. A catalogue entry does not establish that every rule is active for an organisation or applicable to a run. |
COTO TMH-9 — Manual for Visual Assessment of Road Pavements
Source edition: Committee Draft Final, May 2016; Part A general guidance and applicable pavement parts. Read the publisher’s PDF.
Source locators: Part A §A.1.4 manual structure and §A.2 distress attributes; pavement-specific Parts B–E.
| Relevant files or work | Visual assessment of flexible, concrete, block and unpaved pavements. TMH-18 .flx, .con, .blc and .vgi are exchange-file families related to these assessment outputs. |
|---|---|
| Platform scope | Selected checks on visual-condition exchange fields through the applicable TMH-18 template. Use the pavement-specific field layout and inspect its rules and findings. |
| What this does not establish | The platform does not perform or accredit the field assessment. File checks do not establish assessor competence, observation quality or full compliance with the TMH-9 assessment procedure. |
COTO TMH-22 — Road Asset Management Manual
Source edition: March 2013 draft (V8b source). Read the publisher’s PDF.
Source locators: §D.5.2 information requirements and data transfer; §D.5.12 data integrity.
| Relevant files or work | Road asset management processes and information requirements. This is contextual guidance rather than a single survey-file upload format. |
|---|---|
| Platform scope | Guidance connecting data exchange, review records and a handover to the wider asset-management process. Validation findings can form part of the evidence retained for a delivery. |
| What this does not establish | TMH18 Validator does not certify an organisation’s asset-management system or establish whole-manual TMH-22 compliance. Its certificate records the platform workflow and file identity. |
Establish coverage for your delivery
- Record the edition and delivery profile required by the receiving authority.
- Identify the file family and compare its layout, field units and identifiers with that edition.
- Inspect the selected template’s fields and rules. Its internal version label alone does not prove manual coverage.
- For a project, review the active reference set, alignment settings and any inferred or missing reference information.
- Read the completed result, including warnings, exceptions and skipped/not-checked items. Retain the evidence needed for requirements outside the platform’s checks.
The survey-file intake currently accepts .csv, .rsv, .rss, .cid, .fwd, .net, .rcl, .lan, .adt, .flx, .con, .blc, .vgi, .vcb, .vcc, .vcf, .vcu, .f25. Geometry is handled separately through project references; it is not accepted merely by renaming it as one of these survey-file extensions.
Committee Draft 5.0 describes geometry as GML with its schema or shapefile components (§§2.3–2.5). The project reference workflow supports geometry intake and reports its applicable checks and limitations. Supplying a map does not establish that every spatial requirement was checked.
Draft Version 4 (October 2014) remains a labelled legacy reference. The older visual extensions .vcf, .vcc, .vcb and .vcu must not be treated as the Version 5 layouts simply by changing a filename.
A certificate records the file’s SHA-256 digest and the platform review actions. The digest supports comparison of file bytes; it is not a per-engineer cryptographic signature or proof that field measurements are accurate.
TMH18 Validator is operated independently by DATSEMBRA (Pty) Ltd. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by COTO, the Department of Transport, SANRAL or any government authority. Platform certificates are private attestations, not government certifications.
Continue to the operator handbook, articles and guides or the public certificate verifier.