Jason is right about looking at the issues before the volume of data gets
out of hand, and, as
FISH is where we discuss data standards, I hope we can include the newer
complexities.
Could we have this as an agenda item, for the meeting in July, to look at
the implications?

Annie Given
NI Sites and Monuments Record
Environment & Heritage Service: Built Heritage
5-33 Hill St
BELFAST BT1 2LA

tel:  028 9054 3013       fax: 028 9054 3111
[log in to unmask]
www.ehsni.gov.uk




-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Siddall [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 14 June 2001 11:05
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Future Directions -Reply -Reply


Thank you Paul

I think that this is a meaty issue that should be within FISH's remit ... i
think
Paul you are right if not FISH who?

There is a good resource out there with some good examples that could
help us inform the setting of standards in content and practice.

There are standards of content etc out there but they seem to have been
developed by architects, building surveyors etc and then just fitted to
archaeology. The issues of standard content, symbols etc will i agree
with Paul become a key issue in being able to deliver information.

Certaintly we are seeing more and more digital information being
generated by our surveyors... (internal and external staff)  much of
which has no base line standards of content, terminology etc. It really
would be helpful and save me (and others that must deal with this data)
alot of time if we had such standards.

I suppose it is a case of
"a stitch in time saves nine"

Internally this information is slowly becoming integrated into the system
as The National Trust does not see the SMR as just the text database but
as whole resource that includes survey archives, photos, maps, plans
etc. I think it is something that is best resolved when the resource is
small.

What does everyone else feel about this ......??  Ed do you feel that this
is something that FISH can politicly be included in?

I do feel that we must address this and FISH should/would be a great
forum for these issues .... it is worth thinking about and in terms of
content standards and cross country membership ..... something that is
right up FISH's street (or river).

Jason A. Siddall
NTSMR Officer
>>> Paul Gilman AAG Manager ES <[log in to unmask]>
13/June/2001 01:44pm >>>
        I think Jason has managed to summarise very well what I was
driving
at.
        The lack of standards has inhibited and will inhibit future use of
national projects such as
        historic landscapes and urban surveys. Many SMRs are now
grappling
with how best to depict
        the historic environment on CAD and GIS, for polygons and lines,
and
also points. There is also the
        issue of whether it is possible to define standard symbol sets for
heritage features, especially as the OS
        seem less keen on showing archaeological sites on their digital
maps. These are clearly areas for
        the heritage sector to address and there don't seem to be any other
contendors than FISH. English Heritage
        started a spatial standards working party some time ago but that
soon fizzled out. As Jason says, it is time
        something was done while the problem is relatively small, but the
problem is growing fast.
        Paul Gilman
        Heritage Information and Records Manager
        Essex County Council


This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended only for the
recipient(s) named above.  It may contain confidential or privileged
information and should not be read, copied or otherwise used by any
other
person unless express permission is given.  If you are not a named
recipient, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from your
system.
It is the recipient's responsibility to ensure that appropriate measures are
in place to check for software viruses.