8th January 2007, 11:47 PM
maybe it should be a stated in the spec a, or several named archaeologist who will hold copyright (groan). Most specs I have ever seen normally say somebody who will be doing the work. Seems a bit sinister. Donât they mention specialists and resources. I prepare my specs with my name on it
The recommended list does not exist because it is such a blatant restrictive practise. The IFA is there for archaeologists (diggers not), the curators are not. They are there to grab archaeology off the poor vulnerable developer whenever they can by what ever means which is where us archaeologists have to beware our good names are not drawn into the mud which is what the monitoring threat is and which is why the IFA stitched the monitors up (âplanning archaeologistâ) in the standards by giving such a undoable task -particularly when there is no guidence as to what is a good monitoring ..... maybe I was a bit rash to call for a change to the standard (must be a bit of Roman in the blood)
The recommended list does not exist because it is such a blatant restrictive practise. The IFA is there for archaeologists (diggers not), the curators are not. They are there to grab archaeology off the poor vulnerable developer whenever they can by what ever means which is where us archaeologists have to beware our good names are not drawn into the mud which is what the monitoring threat is and which is why the IFA stitched the monitors up (âplanning archaeologistâ) in the standards by giving such a undoable task -particularly when there is no guidence as to what is a good monitoring ..... maybe I was a bit rash to call for a change to the standard (must be a bit of Roman in the blood)