When giving record data, I always repeat exactly as it appears in the record. I don't enhance the precision.
I don't have a reference for that, it just seems to be common sense.
Dane. I am including an excerpt from our manual on "Classifications of Accuracy and Standards". In Chapter 5 it states:
"5.2-1 Significant Figures
The significant figures of a measurement are those digits which are known plus one estimated digit following the known digits.
Recorded numerical values, measured and computed, must contain only those digits which are known, plus one estimated digit. Recorded field measurements should never indicate a precision greater than that used in the actual survey. For example, when measurements are made with a cloth tape, values should be recorded to the nearest 0.1 foot rather than 0.01 foot."
Earlier on in the discussion Mr. Page reasoned and the "3 strikes" which I agree with. We should not report any precision greater that that which we are in direct control of.
The manual that I refer to is located at: Caltrans Survey Manual Chapter 5
Since you had asked for a reference ?.
Is that also the convention followed in drafting survey plans in South Australia, Richard?
Yes Kent I set Liscad cad output up to the standards required by the Lands Titles Office. Included below is link our plan presentation guidelines... Our Bible..
Note also the check sheets...
RADU