This page (revision-50) was last changed on 12-May-2016 15:24 by Chris Martin

This page was created on 17-Sep-2012 14:49 by Alison Bennett

Only authorized users are allowed to rename pages.

Only authorized users are allowed to delete pages.

Page revision history

Version Date Modified Size Author Changes ... Change note
50 12-May-2016 15:24 16 KB Chris Martin to previous
49 11-May-2016 12:47 16 KB Chris Martin to previous | to last
48 21-Apr-2016 16:51 16 KB Stephanie Leith to previous | to last
47 28-Mar-2015 14:46 16 KB Suzy Blake to previous | to last
46 28-Mar-2015 14:44 16 KB Suzy Blake to previous | to last
45 28-Mar-2015 14:35 16 KB Suzy Blake to previous | to last
44 28-Mar-2015 14:32 16 KB Suzy Blake to previous | to last
43 27-Mar-2015 14:16 16 KB Suzy Blake to previous | to last
42 27-Mar-2015 14:15 16 KB Suzy Blake to previous | to last
41 27-Mar-2015 14:10 16 KB Suzy Blake to previous | to last

Page References

Incoming links Outgoing links
SectionB.5
SectionB.5

Version management

Difference between version and

At line 13 changed one line
During the 1990s much work was undertaken by the RCHME's Data Standards Unit (now part of English Heritage) in partnerships with English Heritage and ALGAO to develop the data model for recording SMR-type information. The event-monument-source data model began to be introduced in the early 1990s when it was adopted by the RCHME for its MONARCH database, by English Heritage in its data standard for urban archaeological databases and by Northamptonshire SMR and a few others. Throughout the 1990s there was considerable discussion about this data model led by Glenn Foard, Steve Catney, Neil Lang, Nigel Clubb and Steve Stead. The establishment of the Data Standards Working Party, now known as FISH (the Forum for Information Standards in Heritage), a group dedicated to developing data standards for monument inventories, can be seen as a direct result of the general climate of discussion and debate (see also B.7).
During the 1990s much work was undertaken by the RCHME's Data Standards Unit (now part of English Heritage) in partnerships with English Heritage and ALGAO to develop the data model for recording SMR-type information. The event-monument-source data model began to be introduced in the early 1990s when it was adopted by the RCHME for its MONARCH database, by English Heritage in its data standard for urban archaeological databases and by Northamptonshire SMR and a few others. Throughout the 1990s there was considerable discussion about this data model led by Glenn Foard, Steve Catney, Neil Lang, Nigel Clubb and Steve Stead. The establishment of the Data Standards Working Party, now known as FISH (the Forum for Information Standards in Heritage), a group dedicated to developing data standards for monument inventories, can be seen as a direct result of the general climate of discussion and debate (see also [B.7|SectionB.7]).
At line 15 changed one line
The modern generation of HER databases aims to comply with the MIDAS data standard published by the RCHME in 1998 (Lee 1998). These databases enable information about monuments, events, sources and the management process to be recorded with equal weight. Nationally agreed reference datasets, such as the English Heritage Thesaurus of Monument Types and other lists published in INSCRIPTION, are incorporated into the databases (see also B.6.3). Features of the systems, such as pull-down lists and validated entry to key index fields, help to ease the adoption of data standards and promote consistency between HER systems. In general professional applications developers have produced these systems and, as a result, they incorporate features such as data-input forms, standard queries and reports that ease their day-to-day use by HER officers.
The modern generation of HER databases aims to comply with the MIDAS data standard published by the RCHME in 1998 (Lee 1998). These databases enable information about monuments, events, sources and the management process to be recorded with equal weight. Nationally agreed reference datasets, such as the English Heritage Thesaurus of Monument Types and other lists published in INSCRIPTION, are incorporated into the databases (see also [B.6.3|http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/ifp/Wiki.jsp?page=SectionB.6#section-SectionB.6-B.6.3MIDASAndINSCRIPTION]). Features of the systems, such as pull-down lists and validated entry to key index fields, help to ease the adoption of data standards and promote consistency between HER systems. In general professional applications developers have produced these systems and, as a result, they incorporate features such as data-input forms, standard queries and reports that ease their day-to-day use by HER officers.
At line 30 changed 2 lines
!!B.5.3 Archaeological science (see also B.4.4)
Many HERs also have access to a range of scientific data, and again the processes of education and management are facilitated where these can be integrated into the HER database. Different types of information may be linked in a variety of different ways: geophysical data for example may be integrated into the GIS; microscopy and radiographs be linked to an image management system and scientific reports linked through ‘grey literature reports’ and the like. Much scientific data, especially site-based recording should in fact be considered as any other archaeological intervention. Tools like OASIS and the FISH toolkit provide mechanisms by which such data can be supplied to HERs. These standards are discussed in more detail in section B.6, B.7.
!!B.5.3 Archaeological science (see also [B.4.4|http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/ifp/Wiki.jsp?page=SectionB.4#section-SectionB.4-B.4.4InclusionOfArchaeologicalScienceDataInHERs])
Many HERs also have access to a range of scientific data, and again the processes of education and management are facilitated where these can be integrated into the HER database. Different types of information may be linked in a variety of different ways: geophysical data for example may be integrated into the GIS; microscopy and radiographs be linked to an image management system and scientific reports linked through ‘grey literature reports’ and the like. Much scientific data, especially site-based recording should in fact be considered as any other archaeological intervention. Tools like OASIS and the FISH toolkit provide mechanisms by which such data can be supplied to HERs. These standards are discussed in more detail in section [B.6|SectionB.6], [B.7:SectionB.7].
This page (revision-50) was last changed on 12-May-2016 15:24 by Chris MartinTop