2nd February 2006, 05:53 PM
You can even put in an application for a site you don't own - which makes sense on one hand but not much on the other! And I am with Invisible Man here, you can't penalise the developers. That said, you can certainly watch some more carefully than others if they have a track record of bending permissions!
Back to archiving - this is a monster problem, not just ownership, which is Byzantine in itself. At our depository, they will not accept archives without a transfer of ownership. I've never had someone serious refuse ont eh grounds that treasure might show up, but have had a company refuse to release archives on the grounds of client confidentiality. A compromise was reached, but only because, the site was negative and the archive could be reduced to the report without too much harm.
But other archiving problems include space (how many local museums refuse to accept them now?) and accessibility, not just content.
Ironically, in Canada ALL archaeological artefacts belong to the Queen.
ML
Back to archiving - this is a monster problem, not just ownership, which is Byzantine in itself. At our depository, they will not accept archives without a transfer of ownership. I've never had someone serious refuse ont eh grounds that treasure might show up, but have had a company refuse to release archives on the grounds of client confidentiality. A compromise was reached, but only because, the site was negative and the archive could be reduced to the report without too much harm.
But other archiving problems include space (how many local museums refuse to accept them now?) and accessibility, not just content.
Ironically, in Canada ALL archaeological artefacts belong to the Queen.
ML