Philip Carlisle wrote:

>Nick et al
>I think one of the problems here is the cost implication as well as
>treading on peoples toes.
>
>I'm not sure if exeGesIS, Adlib, oxarchdigital or any other software
>manufacturer would like there to be a freely available software on the
>web for anybody to download. As far as I'm aware (and I'm sure Martin
>will correct me if I'm not) the DoB database was made freely available
>to HERS and relevant heritage bodies but only because the project was
>funded by the HLF.
>
>
Well, if you're designing a database schema from my experience it's
always best to prove your design by creating a set of tables and
inputting some test data. From the cost point of view therefore the
design of a simple database (eg in MS Access) is included in the cost of
designing the schema.

As regards treading on the toes of the companies you've mentioned, our
end-product is not the database - that's just a reference system - but
the schema.  By having the schema open and well documented they are able
to create solutions conformant to the standard each with their own
unique selling point which EH don't provide or the client aren't able to
do themselves - eg linked to one of many GIS systems, or one of many
database systems, or a particular web front end for a client - but
bearing the MIDAS standard 'seal of approval'. But they also benefit by
a free version being given away because the people likely to use this
would be those who couldn't afford their prices anyway (eg local
societies &c) which in turn further spreads the use of and establish the
standard.

>Maybe one solution would be to prepare a data model, specifying
>fieldnames say for MS Access which could be placed on the website as a
>guide. Then people could develop there own to a common structure.
>
>
As mentioned, it you've gone to the trouble of putting together a MS
Access system it would be tremendously beneficial to freely offer that
to the wider community to help spread the takeup of the standard.

Andrew Larcombe