Hi Stuart
The Qualifier field in MonPS is not a MIDAS unit of information, and as far as I know there is no relevant Inscription list; it is simply there because it is useful and because it exists in most SMR datasets.
You can use it as you wish. The four values in your existing pick-list can be altered (with care), and/or you can add to the list if you want to continue using the coded qualifiers mentioned by Wessex.
At the moment you obviously have a mismatch between your pick-list and your actual data, and this should be corrected. This is a System Administrator task - please contact me off-list if you would like any assistance with this.
On the other hand, if you now use a GIS as the primary environment for managing your spatial data, then I would tend to advise that it would be better to record spatial qualifiers in the GIS feature attribute table, rather than in the HBSMR MonPS table. Unfortunately the attribute editing tools in ArcView 3 are much poorer than those within HBSMR (no validation) but it is the logically correct place to hold this information.
The attribute editing tools in ArcGIS 8 are much better, enabling pick-lists/validation. Our MapLink module for ArcGIS 8 is currently under development, and looking good...
Best wishes
Crispin
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Crispin Flower
exeGesIS SDM Ltd.
Great House Barn
Talgarth
Powys
LD3 0AH
Tel: 01874 712145/711145
Fax: 01874 711156
email: [log in to unmask]
URL: www.esdm.co.uk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This E-mail and any files transmitted with it are private and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, the E-mail and any files have been transmitted to you in error and any copying, distribution or other use of the information contained in them is strictly prohibited.
Nothing in this E-mail message amounts to a contractual or other legal commitment on the part of exeGesIS SDM Ltd unless confirmed by a signed communication.
exeGesIS SDM Ltd will make every effort to keep its network free of viruses. However, the recipient of this message will need to scan this message, and any attachments, for viruses, as exeGesIS SDM Ltd can take no responsibility for any computer virus that might be transferred by this e-mail.
-----Original Message-----
From: Williams, Elizabeth [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 29 November 2002 11:31
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Exegesis Field Query [No Viruses detected]
FCE, GCE, LIN and LO were listed in RCHME's 'Recording England's Past'
FCE = feature centred
GCE = group or complex centred
LIN = linear
LO = locality only
Liz
-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Cakebread [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 29 November 2002 11:13
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Exegesis Field Query [No Viruses detected]
Hi Crispin,
We have received an email from Wessex Archaeology about some entries in our
MonPS table. I've always assumed that they were left over from some
previous incarnation of the SMR before it was transferred to exegesis. Can
you throw any light on this? The email from Wessex is below.
Regards,
Stuart
Stuart Cakebread
Sites and Monuments Record Officer
Kent County Council
Invicta House
County Hall
Maidstone
Kent
ME14 1XX
01622 221541
>
Paul,
I'm doing some work on the Wessex end of your SMR, and I've a question about
some of the entries in the "MonPS" table, in the "Qualifier" field. There
are 4 items inthe drop down list - Approximate, Estimated from sources, GPS
derived and Surveyed. There are then a load of letters that are not in the
drop down list, and have no explanation. Mark doesn't recognise most of
them, so I was wondering if you could shed some light on them. The ones I am
interested in are:
FCE - is this "fine centred"?
GCE -
KNT
LIN
LO
NBM
NLO - is this "named location"?
PA - is this "position approx"? and is this different from the Approximate
in the drop down list?
Thanks for your help,
Hanna
Hanna Steyne
Project Supervisor
Wessex Archaeology
>
"[log in to unmask]" made the following
annotations on 11/29/02 11:20:03
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
[INFO] -- Virus Manager:
No Viruses were detected in this message.
========================================================================
"[log in to unmask]" made the following
annotations on 11/29/02 11:43:03
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If this is delivered to you in error would you please destroy all
copies of it immediately and contact the sender.
[INFO] -- Virus Manager:
No Viruses were detected in this message.
========================================================================
|