8th January 2006, 07:10 PM
So how many Curators (hands up now) use the IFA standards to regulate what they can hope to see as a well dug/drawn/surveyed site and report.
Or Do we all make it up as we go along? In shich case should ALGAO be standarising (or at least adopt the IFA standard)
We can't get away from the fact that the IFA have the 'best' guidelines, the matter of who ensures the compliance is up to a) The Curator and b) everyone... as it does state clearly that we ALL curate the heritage resource... so if you are on a site... you see the archaeology being damaged/improperly dug etc etc then you have just as much a duty to do something. Now this also requires communication so that you know why a site is being 'dug' in a particular way... so
Clear knowledge of who does what... and also communication with all those involved from Curator to Digger
Another day another WSI?
Or Do we all make it up as we go along? In shich case should ALGAO be standarising (or at least adopt the IFA standard)
We can't get away from the fact that the IFA have the 'best' guidelines, the matter of who ensures the compliance is up to a) The Curator and b) everyone... as it does state clearly that we ALL curate the heritage resource... so if you are on a site... you see the archaeology being damaged/improperly dug etc etc then you have just as much a duty to do something. Now this also requires communication so that you know why a site is being 'dug' in a particular way... so
Clear knowledge of who does what... and also communication with all those involved from Curator to Digger
Another day another WSI?