Jason commented on the ALGAO Event Types lists that there is a need for
wider coverage to meet the needs of the National Trust SMR (and potentially
My approach is that there are two issues here which it might be useful to
consider separately, namely i) the scope of the terminology and ii) a
recording practice issue(in this case what MIDAS refers to as the 'Sphere of
If the recording practice of an SMR is to record events that of their nature
only take place at a site, which in my understanding is the strict
interpretation of the current EMA model, then the list is OK (subject to the
usual qualifier that candidate terms within the scope of the list can be
submitted for consideration).
If your recording practice interpretation of Events is broader in scope,
then it follows that the terminology list will need additional terms. The
two issues overlap.
I suggest the solution is to develop an agreed list of 'extensions' to the
ALGAO list, such that users can choose to adopt either the strict ALGAO
list, if that suits their uses, or an extended list 'ALGAO+' which will
include all the ALGAO terms, plus additional terms. This does in any way
detract from the ALGAO standard - as I said it is defined in order to meet a
strict criterion for what an 'Event' is.
In addition to management and interpretation events that you mention Jason
there are also the post-excavation analysis 'events' for example that might
be appropriate to the sphere of interest of, for example, an archaeological
science recording system such as that proposed by Dominique (see the SMR
Enhancement thread from last month).
So there's a variety of ways to develop the list of Event Types lists - the
key thing is to ensure that they work together, adopt a common structure,
and don't conflict in points of detail. If this sounds like a priority to be
tackled now, then can I suggest that this discussion transfers to the FISH
EH Data Services Unit