Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2008
I always think that the context numbers look cold and naked if they don't have brackets round them - like wearing little jackets :p i say get rid of context numbers altogether and just use shapes! Deposit *prancing unicorn* was cut by ditch *pogo stick*
Posts: 2
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2006
BAJR Wrote:Wonder if we could create a UK wide convention? How useful would that be? :face-approve:
Should have been done years ago ! One set of conventions across the UK to standardise all recording would save many hours of frustration .........especially in px
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
monty Wrote:Should have been done years ago ! One set of conventions across the UK to standardise all recording would save many hours of frustration .........especially in px
I agree in principle...........as long as everyone agrees to use the system I use }
How could this work in principle? Getting archaeologists to agree is like herding cats.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Jack Wrote:.........but I think you will find, on page 53 of our recording manual a clear illustration of a plan of a ditch with a cut number in a rectangular box and the fill number in an oval box.}
Which as you well know was pointed out at it's first appearance in the previous edition to be wrong, shame the illus just got recycled into the new one to save time - gather from Seedygirl you spent
ages unsuccessfully trying to find something in the text though, good effort :face-approve:
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
monty Wrote:Should have been done years ago ! One set of conventions across the UK to standardise all recording would save many hours of frustration .........especially in px
Should avoid numbers though, at least till diggers can all write them readably.....and someone comes up with a marker pen that'll keep working for more than 2 minutes on site
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
Dinosaur Wrote:Which as you well know was pointed out at it's first appearance in the previous edition to be wrong, shame the illus just got recycled into the new one to save time - gather from Seedygirl you spent ages unsuccessfully trying to find something in the text though, good effort :face-approve:
Not exactly ages. More like a minute.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2011
Jack Wrote:Not exactly ages. More like a minute.
Now, now boys...don't want to be dragged into this. I merely stated that you were like a pit bull with a bone when you had the eureka moment when you found what you were looking for!
. Don't know why yous (that's for Jack) couldn't just turn around and have this discussion...
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
He wasn't in the office.
There's a bookcase in the way.
Its an important topic for the whole BAJR community.
I vote for Dirty's shapes instead of numbers, then you could split the types of numbers by category.
Say, animals for cuts, plants for fills/ groups/ structure etc., minerals for small finds and furniture for samples.
Just so my next site narrative can read.........
'To the north was a collection of pits (Group Banana), the easternmost (Gorilla) was filled with cabbage.
Gorilla also produced a interesting object (Nugget) from the sample (stool) taken.'
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2011
ah but I see a flaw! What would happen if I found Brassica sp. in your cabbage! Eh....didn't think that one through...or were you pre-empting the palaeobotanical rep?...and where do I begin with the stool...?:face-thinks:
