Due to some technical problems the email below does not appear to have hit the list so I am trying again. Apologies if this arrives twice.

********************

To kick off Day 5 of our e-conference, I am pleased to post below the last scheduled presentation of Session One . Although some of the issues raised here by Jason and Paul have been discussed earlier this week, I believe that there is still much in this paper we have yet to cover fully and it also provides a useful summary of the main issues we need to address if we are to progress beyond our current situation.

Nigel.

Standards in GIS

The document below represents my personal opinion and is written to open discussion

For many years we as archaeologist have been generating huge amounts of information and data in a whole host of differing formats, which includes raw data, reports and maps. The developments in IT are just one example where archaeologists have capitalised on new developments or technologies. The last 10 years has seen our procedures, practices and indeed how we think revolutionised through the application of a whole host of systems and complex software.

In many ways the application of Information Technology has been a great boon to the archaeology profession, over the years archaeologists have adopted systems that had previously been developed by other professions. One such example is our experience with complex databases which is now well developed with sophisticated levels of understanding of architecture and the need for coherent standards. Increasingly we have begun to look at other systems to augment our understanding of the historic environment.

The adoption of GIS is one such system that has recently become a key tool to understanding the historic environment. Compared to databases for the UK at least, the application of GIS in the archaeology profession is still in its infancy. As projects and systems have developed GIS has increasingly become a component of displaying and analysing complex information.

Below are a number of Key Issues for the implementation of GIS in Archaeology:

Inconsistent development and application
GIS has indeed become a component tool in understanding the historic landscape however it is fair to say that the application of GIS within the subject has been inconsistent and disparate at best. I suggest that due to the inconsistent way GIS has developed within archaeology the benefits gained risk being substantially reduced. At present we appear to be led not by a vision of how we wish to display and manipulate data but by the limitations of the systems and software we are using. This lack of vision and indeed understanding of GIS is creating a whole host of approaches without thinking about long term integration of information. I would suggest that we must have a vision of how we want to use this technology to display, manipulate and exchange this information in a meaningful way. Indeed there would seems to be little discussion between academic and the commercial sectors in how best to use GIS.

Common Standards and Practices
The importance of common standards and practices is readily attested within the archaeology profession and there is now a host of organisations, documents, reports on standards and practices. Apart from guideline notes published by ADS as yet there is very little in terms of the application of GIS within the profession.

Although the application of GIS is still in its infancy there is a substantial and growing resource of GIS data within the UK. There is a large body of material that has generated regional and national information such as the Historic Landscape Characterisation or the Urban Surveys. Much of this resource is going largely un-used and lacks any integration. Indeed at present there seems to be little common standards in the Historic Landscape Characterisation Surveys. As a result, it seems impossible that this key information can be integrated to give a national picture without having to rework some of the information.

Unlike our databases the GIS data seems to be largely un-audited and held in inconsistent formats with little common standards in content or terminology.  I have begun to wonder if we actually have an understanding of just what GIS data is within the UK. Also do we know what metadata is attached and what standards have been applied?

The lack of standards can only inhibit the future utilisation of GIS data. I feel that some central direction is desperately required, but increasingly archaeologists are re-inventing the wheel or adopting standards applied by building surveyors, architects or landscape surveyors. The lack of any nationally accepted standards has resulted in numerous equally valid approaches being developed but no consistency.

I would suggest that although this information is growing it is at present relatively small, however if the profession does not agree standards soon we will have a mountain of information that cannot be integrated or exchanged easily.

We must consider content and technical issues that include

Depiction of the historic landscape on GIS
do we use point, polygons, lines
do we use continuous surfaces
do we use different colours or layers to depict periods or site types

do we want Event and Finds data depicted on our layers

What other information do we wish on our GIS layers
        do we want SAM areas (should we not get these from EH)
        do we want SSSI etc
        how do we make this information exchangeable
        how do we represent 3D in GIS
        how do we represent time as well as space
 
I think we are at a very important time in terms of the development of the GIS. I feel it is necessary and prudent to try to build a consensus, as we have done with database standards and practices. Evidently one-size data standard cannot fit to everyone's needs but we must begin to consider the development of baseline standards or exemplars of good practice. I currently have more questions than answers, and I don't think that I am alone in this. We all have developed approaches to generating this data but not "THE ANSWER"- even if there is one. However I think we must begin the process to develop realistic guidance to promote consistency throughout our recording practices to maximise the use of the data that we generate. I think that this can only help all of us to develop integrated resources and exchange information.

By Jason Siddall, National Trust SMR Officer, following discussions with and with amendments by Paul Gilman, Heritage Information and Records Manager, Essex County Council.

This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended only for the recipient(s) named above.  It may contain confidential or privileged information and should not be read, copied or otherwise used by any other person unless express permission is given.  If you are not a named recipient, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from your system. It is the recipient's responsibility to ensure that appropriate measures are in place to check for software viruses.