Hello all,

This message is intended to summarise discussion on this list of areas for
development in a second edition of MIDAS, the content standard and manual,
to be developed by FISH in the next eighteen months to two years. The full
discussion is archived at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/fish.html
under 'September 2003'.

First of all though my thanks to all those who have contributed their time
and thoughts.

What follows is ordered by topic, starting with general points. They are not
presented in any order of priority here.

If you wish to re-open discussion on any of these points, please use the
appropriate paragraph heading as a Subject line.

Thanks again everyone.

Ed

* General approach
Support was expressed for a second edition that is aimed at a broad
audience, not just the professionally maintained HERs and SMRs but also
local societies and individual researchers. The current edition is seen as
fairly readable, but that it is still not clear enough to encourage take up
by those without a background in standards.

A suggested approach is to plan for both a technical reference manual, plus
a simplified 'user guide'. A further suggestion is for a single well
publicised point of contact for advice and assistance.

Special emphasis is needed on the clarity of the text. MIDAS 2 will aim to
be approved by the Plain English Campaign.

* Landscapes
MIDAS needs to capture the best way to communicate cultural value, not try
to cover aspects relevant to other disciplines.

* Definition of Monuments
Still tends to associate 'monuments' with above ground archaeological
feature, so may be causing some confusion. Need to clarify in the definition
of 'Monument' - or choose a new Information scheme name.

* Technical advice
Requested on file formats for images. Suggested but not much support for
this within MIDAS - other sources provide this, but noted that MIDAS needs
more on references to these other sources of help.

* Concepts versus field definitions
Support expressed for keeping MIDAS at a generic concept level. However
there may be some advantages e.g to adding unique identifiers for each
concept that could be used as field names. (This issue to be covered in next
consultation on structure / content).

Possibility raised of a MIDAS compatible database (either via the web, or as
a download) aimed at the independent sector, to support those who do not
have access to database designers. Useful, but a separate project. There is
a close link to the fish.technical discussion on XML formats for data
interchange.

* Location Info scheme
This needs to be revised to cater for non  U.K. mainland situation, in grid
referencing, and for administrative areas other than England.

* Education, audience and presentation
Some interest shown in development of this area to support recording and
presntation of educational / presentation materials, as a higher priority
than property facilities type information. Support expressed for rights of
way, legal access agreements inclusion. Also disabled access.
There is probably a need for clearer definition of property managers
information needs.

* Legal entities
Support given to treatment of legally defined areas as a separate heading,
e.g. a priority for HERs to support development control.

* Relation between SPECTRUM and MIDAS
Opinion split between different MIDAS users on this one. Development control
does not require any closer integration, but research use of HERs does.
Needs clearer definition of what closer integration would actually mean.

* MIDAS resource information scheme
Some interest and possible leads on use of broadcast programmes as a
potential resource.

* MIDAS for field archaeology data recording
Some interest shown in this, and the suggestion made that compliance at
different levels of detail (e.g. common context data, but different
post-exc. / analysis) would make it easier units to comply.