hmm
with the portable antiquites scheme this will be a type of data that will
increase.
The whole issue of displaying fuzzy data is as yet ... up in the air. It is a
shame if what we have to do is lose the direct link to our SMR systems
... Within the trust we are begining to look at other means of integrating
information into systems.
data and the need to develop and provide content is the driver (i.e FINDS
information in your case)
I do think and i seem to remeber alot of my fellow Exegesis sub group
members felt that the SMR systems of the future must have GIS as the
heart of them and that indeed we must begin to think of layers that can
be "switched on and off" at the click of a button allowing you to build a
picture..
hmm
victoria, peter what do you have to say on this matter???
the way such could work is either by
types:
finds
monuments
buildings
routeways
etc
or even by period
medieval
post medieval etc
the whole approach to how we show and use our data needs some
consideration as the data becomes more inclusive and more
sosphicated.
this layer approach has functionality that we are just not getting with the
present systems available. IF PEOPLE WANT THAT SORT OF
FUNCTIONALITY. At the moment we are stuck on what is actually a
digital version of a map not a functional tool.
Having to go back to the GIS and losing the link to the text database and
images is a problem. Its almost a step back ..
i really do agree with you .. it is something that needs developing and
soon
hmm indeed I had forgotten about the FISH e-conference on GIS and
Mapping - well worth a look Ingrid....
It seems to me that this is a perenial problem that no matter how much
liason and discussion does not seem to be any where nearer to being
resolved ... there is an opportunity here and a trick that i think we should
all jump on. I hope that we are not discussing this very issue this time
next year. I wonder if we need to move forward with what the GIS Sub
group did and broaden that with a National Strategy document on GIS for
Heritage Systems (SMRS etc) which will
1. Galvanise thoughts
2. Provide a document for developers to provide the sort of systems we
want
3. Allow all of use to have a view of where we want and what the
scope should be.
I think we do not have some sort of national strategy then we will end up
with ad-hoc development of systems, standards etc ....
jason
>>> "Peckham, Ingrid" <[log in to unmask]>
30/January/2002 04:01pm >>>
Dear all
I suppose the main problem for us in Southampton is findspots. A lot of
these are very inaccurately located on the ground; the original
information
attached to the find often refers only to a road, park, or former village
(now subsumed within the city boundary). Also, being an urban area,
we have
a lot of them over a relatively small area. So, if I plot findspots as
polygons, I end up with a lot of large overlying/overlapping polygons.
It would be useful to have findspot information plotted on the map layer
as
polygons, but it really does get in the way of other monument types - no
matter what colours or symbols are used. If I held the polygons on a
separate layer, at least I could easily turn that layer off to see the more
exactly located monuments. But ....
I'd be interested to hear more about the tabs solution, although would
prefer to keep the link with the exeGesIS database functional.
Ingrid Peckham,
SMR Assistant, Heritage Conservation Unit,
Cultural Services,
Southampton City Council,
Civic Centre,
Southampton.
SO14 7LP.
Tel: 023 8083 2850
Fax: 023 8033 7593
Email: [log in to unmask]
|