Ed
thanks for the comments
I would welcome any discussion on this matter .... as for other users of
such lists NTS, national parks etc
As i noted I WELCOME this terminology development.
Indeed you are correct there is post-excavation analysis 'events' that
may need to be added.
In terms of events
I have always felt that an event is something that is
alot wider than just field work, it is activities that effects a sites condition,
interpretation or understanding.
that is certainly the approach within the trust ... and indeed the AIP and
the excavation index seem very interested in restoration and
intrepretation as well.
If this is the agreed list we will use this list .... however we will be adding
our own stuff in terms of ........
Management (it is important to know the tree has been removed or the
wall has been rebuilt on that roman structure), Monitoring, interpretation,
etc
So is it important that we talk about it now well i would say yes - if this
lists goes live then indeed we must have the facet lists prepared!!!
cheers
jas
>>> "Lee, Edmund" <[log in to unmask]> 4/February/2002
02:11pm >>>
Hello all,
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
other users).
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
Interest' issue).
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
list?
Edmund Lee
EH Data Services Unit
|