Hello folks

I know the debate has already sort of started, but here are some of my thoughts (not my employers)

Ed Mentioned the following Points

>Closer integration of Historic Environment Records with those maintained by related sectors, such
>as museums, archives and libraries,

This mirrors the FISH debate on XML format, in that for most HER's (in Local Authorities anyway) I believe these links will be aspirational at the moment rather than actual, or imminent. In that context, I think this aspect of MIDAS should be a lower priority than other areas. In the first instance I think any such link on our part would just be something that says here is their website for you to look at, incorporating and concording their data with ours is a long way off.

>Within our own sector, how do we bridge the divide between archaeological context records gathered on site, and >those who manage databases of thousands of excavations?

This point is one that is a lot more relevant. I had the unique experience recently of a contractor contacting me to ask how we would want them to structure their database for these records, to help data exchange! When I had picked myself off the floor and got back into my chair, and had a cuppa to recover from the shock, I realised I didn't have a good answer, so fudged it by suggesting something else. However, this could be something that increasingly we may want to consider. It may be that what is needed is not how to import these datasets into HER's (purely from logistics) but some sort of standardised way for a: these sorts of databases (Finds, Context etc) to be formatted so that B; HER Officers can fairly easily extract the sorts of data they might want into their database. I am not sure if what I have suggested is the best way, but this issue would be more pressing (I think) than linking to e.g. Libraries etc

>Coverage:What aspects of Historic Environment information requirements should it deal with? Content:What content is required to deal with these requirements?

I am not sure what you mean by Aspects, and Content but it should include Aircraft Crash site and Maritime standards (and believe these have already been started?? sort of??)) Ed also mentioned the issues of Landscapes, but we at NYCC already have some crude landscape records, and are probably going to ditch them soon because they are not very usefully constructed (for our present needs anyway, they served their purpose in the past) and from a mapping point of view can quite easily mask everything else. But given present mapping capabilities do we need a separate landscape unit of record?? If so, what for? If you can answer those questions then you have decided if landscapes should be in MIDAS II.

And I think it is the what for bits that determine the form of MIDAS II, IE what sort of data you see as being core data. In the above examples, we would want to know about Aircraft sites as they are protected and potentially at threat from development, so we need to know about them in enough detail to protect them. Maritime records, on the other hand, are less at risk from development (and not our responsibility to protect if I have understood correctly) so we might want to know about them in enough detail to provide information to people about them only. The two types of information (IE for protection and for information) are not mutually exclusive, and overlap, but what is core to one (e.g. condition of monument for protection) might be optional for something you only need to provide information for. I am unsure if that makes as much sense as I think it does, but will send it anyway.

>Format:How should this content be presented - Does the current format meet your needs? Audience: Should we be >broadening the audience for MIDAS?
Yes, I think we should be encouraging every local Society with a database, every interest Group which records data relevant to us, to be aware of and using MIDAS. It would make data exchange a lot easier, at least. I am dealing with a number of local and National Groups to try and get their data into the SMR, and I can fudge it in, but it would be nicer not to have to. However, MIDAS is fairly dull to read and technical, and to try and encourage more take up, the format of it needs to be re-considered - perhaps a more user friendly version could be used (though to be fair, its pretty good as it is). The format might also include e.g. a downloadable MIDAS compatible standard database for use with your project, which you can edit to a certain extent and which comes with an easily formattable manual for you to edit to record how you have actually used it for your project

Delivery: What delivery mechanisms should we be using to allow MIDAS to reach these audiences?

I think I have suggested something for that above, but the point is there needs to be a MIDAS, helpline' type affair (even if it is not done by phone). If we are encouraging amateurs/non-professional/avocational (pick your own term) archaeologists to use MIDAS, they are going to need guidance in how you turn some of the generalities in MIDAS into a database. What I mean is that, from the point of view of someone who likes rock art and wants to record it in a database the whole thing I am sure seems scarily big, confusing, complicated, and perhaps even unnecessary. MIDAS II needs to make it appear less so. Now I am sure DSU/NMR/SMR/HER types would happily give advice (and probably do) to people if asked, and it gives sources of further advice in MIDAS, but I think there needs to be one place to go to for advice which is made obvious on the first page of the Manual itself. I think that would help encourage take up.

my views, not my employers

best wishes

Nick Boldrini
SMR Computing Officer
Heritage Unit
North Yorkshire County Council
Direct Dial (01609) 532331
http://www.northyorks.gov.uk/environment/heritage.shtm#Archaeology

North Yorkshire County Council has the right 
and does inspect E-Government mails sent
from and to its computer system.


WARNING

This E-mail and any attachments may contain information that is confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken is prohibited and may be unlawful.

Any opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily the view of the Council.

North Yorkshire County Council.