john
hmm you have slightly mis-represented me there or maybe i did not explain it
well enough
The items i had listed were indeed legal (on the whole) boundaries. In fact
even the local designated historic boundaries in some situations are
enforceable (in planning terms). I do not advocate a centrallised generation
of GIS data although for key data sets that can and are subject to possible
dispute then indeed they should be generated from a single appropriate (that
can be any number of organisations as with inscription) source. Indeed
people can generate what they wish but there must be key data sets (like
sams, historic/conservation areas - a good example is the Cirencenster area
its local but does have enforceable planning constraints or even boundaries
of NT land where bye laws are in opporation) that must be generated from a
single source and made available. My list was off the top of my head and
what i wanted was to think about what key data sets we would like to see pre
generated.
The issue of people generating their own data is not a problem (obviously it
is necessaey to have some base line standards just as we do with databases).
The issue is the very real need to begin to look at accountability when some
of this data is generated from a whole host of sources non of which agrees
with the other. Some of these layers we are generated my fall flat when they
actually are subject to dispute. I would love to see EH generate SAM
boundaries and would love to see some of the local conservation areas or
even Listed bouldings.
To be able to integrate and exchange data we must start thinking about
common base line standards that does not mean total centralisation. I do not
and never have sought centralisation however there must be key datasets that
should be pre-generated and there must be basic data standards that we can
apply to all data we generate.
Jason A.Siddall
NTSMR Officer
-----Original Message-----
From: John Wood [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 1:21 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: SAMs on GIS
Well, I can't resist responding to Jason's:
"these key sets of data (SAMS are just one) must be owned and
generated centrally..... indeed they should only have one author and yes
John you are right they must be readily accessible."
No No No!
SAMs and SSSIs have to be generated centrally because they are centralised
designations with specific, legal boundaries. But I utterly disagree
otherwise. Let everyone generate whatever data they like - I for one am
committed to decentralisation. Archaeology is about perceptions and
differing values, which can inform and stimulate. It is also, from where I
sit, about community, not central, ownership.
John
----------------------------------------------------------
John Wood
Senior Archaeologist
Planning and Development Service
The Highland Council
Glenurquhart Road
Inverness IV3 5NX
Tel: 01463 702502 Fax: 01463 702298
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: <http://www.higharch.demon.co.uk>
This Email (and any attachment) is intended for the exclusive use of the
addressee(s) only. You should not disclose its contents to any other
person. If you receive this message in error, please contact the sender
and delete the message. Thank you
Opinions expressed herein are my own and do not necessarily represent
those of my employer.
|