I'm new to this list and a little bit surprised by the quality and quantity
of discussions I've so far received. Is this normal? If so would it be
possible to create a digest list where this information could be summarised
as the whole sequence is overwhelming.
This would provide an excellent resource for CRM managers, GIS and database
developers to dip into.
Jason Siddall's summary below is an excellent example.
What do you all think?
Wishing all the best over the festivities
Ant
--------------------------------------------
Anthony Beck
e:mail [log in to unmask] & [log in to unmask]
Tel: 01904 332709
-----Original Message-----
From: The Forum for Information Standards in Heritage (FISH)
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Siddall, Jason
Sent: 20 December 2001 15:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: A quick summary of e-mail discussion
Hi everyone this is just a quick general summary of the results for the
e-mail discussion so far:
· Standards are a good thing (phew - I'm posting to the right list then).
· Codes should be avoid if possible we should aim for using the description
i.e Listed Building instead of LB
· If we do have to use codes then we should aim to have "agreed" standard
terms that are meaningful. Not just xyz.
· Terminologies need to be meaningful and represent the legal definitions.
But have good descriptions and some meaningful qualification.
· We should have an agreed format on how we develop Terminologies
· Terms should be either singular (or plural as
appropriate)
· No punctuation
· Be consistent
· Be clear about the scope, content, terms of use, format that a list
carries in a detailed guidance note.
· The Terminologies must cover the UK as a whole thus there may be a core
standard which can be augmented with auxiliary lists for region, local or
country terms?
· It is possible we need to consider splitting Status of Archaeology from
other Status e.g. Land Use.
· i.e. Recording archaeological Status (SAM, Listed
Building, Historic Park and Garden etc)
separately from Land Use status (e.g. Crown Land, National
Trust Land)
So for those in the peer review PLEASE make comments and suggestions on the
1) Content
2) Scope
3) Format
Of the two terminology lists sent to you
cheers
Jason A. Siddall
NTSMR Officer
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.309 / Virus Database: 170 - Release Date: 17/12/2001
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.309 / Virus Database: 170 - Release Date: 17/12/2001
|