20th August 2009, 05:38 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by monitor lizard
To some extent that also depends on what you mean by 'publish'. If you are talking a glossy photoed coffee table book then of course not. But if you equate publicaiton with dissemination - ie letting the great unwashed (that would be archaeoogical colleagues:face-stir as well as the wider community know what is found then I think most are published, through inclusion in the local SMR/HER, OASIS forms and archives.
ML
Then it's the use of the word published that is unhelpful as I'm sure I'm not alone in considering 'grey literature' reports to be unpublished. I certainly wouldn't consider inclusion on the HER/SMR or OASIS to be published. Perhaps 'disseminated appropriately' would be be a better word. Some pieces of work don't even diserve a report, and indeed some curators/curatorial bodies only ask for a short summary (a page or so) in cases where absolutely nothing is found.