Data copyright © Cotswold Archaeology unless otherwise stated
Kemble Enterprise Park
Tel: 01285 772624
Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are persistent identifiers which can be used to consistently and accurately reference digital objects and/or content. The DOIs provide a way for the ADS resources to be cited in a similar fashion to traditional scholarly materials. More information on DOIs at the ADS can be found on our help page.
DOIs should be the last element in a citation irrespective of the format used. The DOI citation should begin with "doi:" in lowercase followed by the DOI with no spaces between the ":" and the DOI.
DOIs can also be cited as a persistent link from another Web page. This is done by appending the DOI Resolver with the DOI. This would look like:
However, if it is possible it is best to hide the URL in the href property of the <a> tag and have the link text be of the form doi:10.5284/1040803. The HTML for this would look like:
Cotswold Archaeology (2016) Former Ford Site, Wide Lane, Swaythling, Southampton. Watching Brief (OASIS ID: cotswold2-268233) [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor] (doi:10.5284/1040803)
An archaeological watching brief was undertaken by Cotswold Archaeology during a geotechnical investigation associated with the development of the Former Ford Site, Wide Lane, Southampton.
No features or deposits of archaeological interest were observed during groundworks, and no artefactual material pre-dating the modern period was recovered. The construction and subsequent demolition of factory buildings on the site during the 20th century has caused heavy truncation of some areas. The general absence of any obvious signs of a buried soil horizon in the test pits suggests that the modern development has truncated the underlying natural horizon and, consequently, may have affected the survival of archaeological remains. Despite this truncation the watching brief was able to identify that some areas of brickearth, dirty brickearth and a pre-1930s topsoil survive within the site. This evidence along with the limited extent of the geotechnical pits monitored during this watching brief suggests that limited and as yet unidentified archaeological remains may be present in other areas, although these will have been heavily truncated by modern development.