Hi Tyler
your right much of the technolgy exists, that isn't really an issue,
the point I wanted to ask about was more about standards and workload.
There is also an issue about public perception, if you invite people to
take part you have to be able to cope with the extra work (and be seen
to be dealing with it too) or you will annoy them, in my view.
In terms of what you outlined in terms of a work flow, - I believe I
have just done all that, with a Mills database which basically involved
all the stages, but slightly differently in that the data was input into
a separate database, and then imported into our system following checks
and validation by me. As this is the first time I have done this though,
I wouldn't claim that our mechanism is perfect.
To a certain extent, we may also be talking about different shades of
things, I understood Jason to be suggesting the NTSMR would be online,
with the public able to add records from there, which struck me as
problematic, but I don't think that is quite what he is saying (though
am prepared to be corrected)
On your second point, about a separate data structure, could I be
devils advocate and suggest this could be achieved by not importing the
data at all and merely being aware of it through e.g. HEIR Port??
As I said I can see the advantage of using volunteers, and members of
the public to enter data (and we do), but as Ben has pointed out there
is a tension between this and the idea of standards, as well as the
tension between whats needed for DC and what is part of a wider HER. I
don't see this as an either or proposition though, more a question of
what we prioritise. Also, one of my personal bugbears is duplicated
effort and the question is why do we need to have copies of records in
an HER, rather than point at them somewhere else - unless we are going
to do something with them. And that would fit in with your idea of an
HER specialist revising/synthesising different data sources to some sort
of coherence. The point of issue is what data to we want to synthesise,
and to what priority and to what market. In my view our priority market
is the other DC staff who primarily use the SMR, IE there needs should
come first, but that doesn't mean we can't meet those priorities in ways
that aren't useful for other users. Just some thoughts
1) A workflow mechanism that allows contributions to be passed in
front of
the requisite number of discerning eyes before being 'published'. Here
'published' can mean either being visible on the web, becoming formally
a
part of the HER, or both. Workflow provides us with the ability to
monitor quality, but not guarantee it.
2) A data structure that keeps conceptually separate the public's
contributions from the official or statutory record. When moving data
between authorities, not everyone will want what they may see as
peripheral information.
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.
|