7th January 2013, 07:40 PM
kevin wooldridge Wrote:I think that was the point I was trying to make...Why should anyone (developer, researcher, interested 3rd party) have to pay for things time and time again when a definitive updated version of the archaeological potential could be compiled and held by the planning authority, perhaps funded by an access fee (sure to be less than the cost of commissioning a 'fresh' DBA). This also ties into Dino's point and would help ensure both the technical competence and integrity of the DBA.....i dont think you could continually update a national/regional/county/district/ or even borough her. there is usually far too much to be interpretted. a specific site will always require a specific dba with very little opportunity for crossover if it is done properly. and the number of staff working in her/smr that are capable of interpretting the data they collate is worryingly few.
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers