8th August 2007, 12:30 PM
No... please ask...
the reason for 5m accuracy is the locational data for finds within ploughsoil has been shown to be around 5m accuracy from original location... The ploughsoil finds, if showing 'clustering' will be representative of a site beneath... so they would be indicitive of subsurface sites... like fieldwalking in transects... where finds are located in squares.. 10 or 20m in size.
For a survey such as this 5m accuracy would be enough to indicate site beneath... for a battle site though metre accuracy would be a minimum...
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
the reason for 5m accuracy is the locational data for finds within ploughsoil has been shown to be around 5m accuracy from original location... The ploughsoil finds, if showing 'clustering' will be representative of a site beneath... so they would be indicitive of subsurface sites... like fieldwalking in transects... where finds are located in squares.. 10 or 20m in size.
For a survey such as this 5m accuracy would be enough to indicate site beneath... for a battle site though metre accuracy would be a minimum...
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu