Can one perhaps see David's ongoing Churches Database work colouring his perspective on this matter - well at least in the email subject!!!!
I know that the discussion so far has not been 100% serious but IS it really neccessary to change the name of our archaeological records? I'm not sure that it is a good idea. The present name has served us OK over the last 30 years or more and is recognised by a large number of the people who matter most to what we do as managers of the historic environment.
However, if it is agreed generally that there is the need for a new name for SMRs, I would like to make a plea for something that is easy to use. Remember how unwieldy ALGAO has proved to be - I remember the people who had actually defined the name of the association saying at the launchat the Antiquaries that they wished they had given more thought to getting a shorter and easier name. We will have to use it in both long form as well as just the initial letters and Sites and Monuments Record is long enough.......
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|