Morning all,
While not wanting to stifle debate about the need for GIS standards, which
Paul, Jason and Neil have raised, can I suggest that it might be useful to
think about other areas of standards work that FISH may need to address next
month at their inaugural meeting (and in the year ahead)? GIS standards are
now firmly on the agenda.
For example, as I see it, we are at the point in the development of
standards for heritage recording of moving on from developing new
terminology standards to the issue of how to integrate existing standards
for use in searching (e.g. the Thesaurus of Monument Types with the Art and
Architecture Thesaurus), and how to manage the future development of these
standards between different projects and organisations which may have very
different requirements for, for example, level of detail required. (E.g.
contrast the needs of a national monuments record with, say, a specialist
thematic survey of a particular type of monument).
Any thoughts?
By the way - what has put this in my mind is an article I found on the web
from a company called synapse - the url is
http://www.synaptica.com/asis99.asp. The authors Trish Yancey and Dave
Clarke discuss the system architecture necessary to allow joint authoring of
thesauri, and describe a web-based system that they have developed to
provide this. I'd welcome any comments.
Edmund Lee
|