*************************************************************
Any opinions expressed in this e-mail or any attached files
are those of the individual, and not necessarily those of
Shropshire County Council.
This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the addressee. This
communication may contain material protected by law from
being passed on. If you are not the intended recipient and
have received this e-mail in error, you are advised that any
use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this
e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify the IT Technology Services
Manager at Shropshire County Council, telephone 01743 252131
[log in to unmask]
http://www.shropshireonline.gov.uk
*************************************************************
There the can of worms springs out .....words: dead ...flogging and horse
come to mind ...
yes the glory about of being able to double index
at the end sometime we need to get this sorted out from what i have seen in
the project i am running
I am dealing with content from museums, archives and SMR and trying to get
them working as one... they have a number of attributes in common period
(what they are about, etc), place (where they are located, about etc) among
others
things is not one of them agrees on the standards across the board ......
not even in term and span or in terms of practice of how to record .. time
is among those concepts they do not agree on
We should design something and then refine it ... personally i am a
pragamtist do nothing and just talk and people will do their own thing ...
without leadership then its anarchy. Anarchy is bad and makes the situation
worse the longer it goes on ... so response .. we need to get something
done .. something basic agreed then refine and build on it. But i guess
thats easy for me to say as i am not doing it. By the way i am taking
trying to take shots at FISH over this its a big issue ... but we avoid
these things at our peril... but its easy for people like me who are not
going to do the work. As i am no longer apart of the contributing members i
really should keep my mouth shut and not ask that this get done. Personally
as a proof of concept the period terminology that was produced was ok ..
alright it had problems but hay its a first stab... if anyone can do any
better well go ahead.
I would agree with phil index two terms and by the way if you wish to
record occupancy phase then tag the date as a occupancy phase or build date
etc etc i do not thing you should remove that possibility. One size does
not fit all so we make the terminology broad and deep, if all of it does
not fit with what you want use what does.
sorry phil ...I know you wanted to avoid this discussion but its worth
saying it does concern some of the stuff i am dealing with in the DSH
project. within this project we will be looking at terminologies period is
amongst that so going forward for me i will wish to look at this for our
project.
Jason A. Siddall
Project and IT Leader
Discovering Shropshire's History - Learning from our Landscapes
Supported by the Heritage Lottery Fund
"CARLISLE, Phil"
<Philip.Carlisle@ENGLISH-HERIT To: [log in to unmask]
AGE.ORG.UK> cc:
Sent by: "The Forum for Subject: Re: [FISH] Time's up!
Information Standards in
Heritage (FISH)"
<[log in to unmask]>
23/08/2005 16:09
Please respond to "The Forum
for Information Standards in
Heritage (FISH)"
Personally I’d index it as two phases.
The first phase is a construction phase with start and end dates of 1939
display date ‘Interwar period’ or 1939
Then it has a second phase with start date 1939 end date 1945 and display
date ‘Operational during Second World War’
However this opens up the whole issue of whether we should record
‘occupancy’ phases.
Phil Carlisle
Data Standards Supervisor
National Monuments Record Centre
Kemble Drive
Swindon
SN2 2GZ
+44 (0)1793 414824
The information contained within this e-mail is confidential and may be
privileged. It is intended for the addressee only. If you have received the
e-mail in error, please inform the sender and delete it from your system.
The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed to anyone else or copied
without the sender's consent.
Any views and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of English Heritage. English Heritage
will not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
-----Original Message-----
From: The Forum for Information Standards in Heritage (FISH)
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Evans
Sent: 23 August 2005 16:01
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [FISH] Time's up!
I was going to go on about WWII, but for the time being I won't.
I would however ask if an AA battery built in August 1939 is not WWII
how would I find it in a period search for WWII material if the
extremely arbitrary start date is September 1939!
Thank You
David Evans
Historic Environment Record Officer
Planning & Environment
South Gloucestershire Council
Kingswood
BS15 9TR
01454 863649
From: The Forum for Information Standards in Heritage (FISH)
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CARLISLE, Phil
Sent: 23 August 2005 15:54
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [FISH] Time's up!
May I please apologize for opening this particular can of terms.
M’learned colleague Kieran is frantically trying to coax them all
back into their rusty old can until the next time someone asks how
they should index a Post Modern, Neo-Georgian, anti-aircraft battery!
Once again sorry for the deluge of insanity.
I have a strange feeling this will rear it’s ugly head again in the
not too distant future and we may, god forbid, have to hold another
e-conference on the subject.
If folks think that would be a good idea could they please think
again ;-)
Phil
Phil Carlisle
Data Standards Supervisor
National Monuments Record Centre
Kemble Drive
Swindon
SN2 2GZ
+44 (0)1793 414824
The information contained within this e-mail is confidential and may
be privileged. It is intended for the addressee only. If you have
received the e-mail in error, please inform the sender and delete it
from your system. The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed
to anyone else or copied without the sender's consent.
Any views and opinions expressed in this message are those of the
author and do not necessarily reflect those of English Heritage.
English Heritage will not take any responsibility for the views of
the author.
English Heritage is subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
All information held by the organisation will be accessible in
response to a Freedom of Information request, unless one of
the exemptions in the Act applies.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it from South
Gloucestershire Council are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error
please notify the South Gloucestershire Council
Postmaster at the address below.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has
been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
[log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
English Heritage is subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
All information held by the organisation will be accessible in
response to a Freedom of Information request, unless one of
the exemptions in the Act applies.
|
