 |
 |
Jason, Paul, Thanks for your comments about GIS (and also Neil about images)- I guess my reservations about getting into this technical area need to be reconsidered. Can I suggest that the following 3-part model for FISH future work is emerging from discussion:- 1. *Content* standards for text-based heritage information (databases, metadata resource descriptions etc). This is currently covered by MIDAS, but needs expanding (and integration with other existing standards)to cover additional areas including (but not limited to):- i)what information should be recorded about historic 'areas' as opposed to individual site-base 'monuments' to support Jaosn National Trust landscape assessments, and EH Power of Place assessments; ii)what should we record about amenity / visitor access and facilities etc; iii)expanding bibliographic, documentary archive and objects type information to the wider remit of 'resources' with an emphsis on educational materials description - c.f. the Metadata in Education Group. 2. *Terminology* standards, again to assist text-based heritage applications covering MIDAS and new areas identified above, particularly to assist retrieval. INSCRIPTION provides a framework for this programme, but needs filling out. Areas to consider might be:- i) Development of new terminologies to cover new areas of content noted above. ii) Development of mappings between existing terminologies to support searching across different data sets. iii) resolving issues such as joint management of terminology resources (e.g. using 'bits' of one thesaurus in another). 3. (the new area) *Technical* standards. This might cover:- i)heritage sector specific recommendations for the use of propietary file formats etc for data interchange between heritage organisations (ESRI shape files for GIS, JPEGs etc) ii)development of XML DTDs to support interchange and searching across various resources. iii) development of interchange protocols - a sort of 'Bath Profile' for the historic environment (see http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/interop-focus/bath/). This is in effect the agenda that UKOLN has for the Libraries sector, and that mda currently provides for museums. Taking this on may mean we have to widen our membership from its current base of data providers to IT providers and consultants, and look for more resources than we currently have, as a purely informal gathering of interested organisations and individuals. Perhaps the moral is that our agenda needs to include not only future work, but future constitution as well... Any thoughts? Edmund FISH Co-ordinator