 |
 |
thanks everyone this is certainly useful i think to us all.... hmm to take up nicks point......... >>>>>>>"With regard to the codes, what is used is fairly irrelevant to me (you say SAM I say SM). The key point about them is that they should have some sort of link to the description (so LB is Listed Building, HB is Historic building, for example) so they are more intuitive to use. After all, as I understand it from HBSMR, the main point of them is to ease inputting (correct me if I am wrong), and in the future to help data exchange." my point in terms of the code is that if we have the same code it makes it easier for all of us to exchange information. For instance if your code is SAM and I use SM (the exegesis SMR records the code not the description). This means i will have to map against your code so we can exchange information. This may not seem like a big issue but consider that as The National Trust we cover nearly all counties and cover England, Wales and Northern Ireland. We as a policy would like to give you our data .... in england alone there is over 60? county SMR's. Many of which use Exegesis.... some do not. For me to map across another SMR's terms takes about 2 days of work (thats if they are using Exegesis where field names etc are not a problem)... taking that forward it would take me at least 120 days to exchange information with all the county SMR'S in just england. Which to be honest is just not possible ..... maybe we should just forget exchange and provide accessibility ... i.e via internet etc Wouldn't it be easier for all of us (we pretty much always have our SMR records inputted as apart of any Historic Landscape Survey which would save you the county SMR haveing to input any of our records - as we could just give you a disk with them already inputted) to exchange information. Also related it would be easier for the encoders, programmers of the world if they had access to a standard set of codes that they knew we are using so any changes to standards, or the nifty programing that Leonard and Richard have been talking about would likely be alot easier for them. so i think actually it is not irrelevant ... its actaully fairly important. An answer might be is that we cease listing by the code in our systems but by the description ... i.e instead of recording SAM in the system it records Scheduled Ancient Monument It would make it easier.... cheers jason