Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2004
There is a clear difference in the process between the contractor uploading it and the verification by the HER. Once the former is done by the contractor, their role is over. What really annoys us are the curators who insist on this being done promptly to allow sign off the condition but a year later later haven't even bothered to verify it (it's not that hard for the HER surely?) and so it isn't in the public domain, which is the whole aim of OASIS. Makes us wonder why we bother being virtuous (apart from that warm inner glow).
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
VoR I am used to looking through mud, could you explain what clear difference there is as to why we have to have the report validated
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
VoR.. tend to agree with that comment.
Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2006
I'm not sure of they 'can' but one of mine does. Once they have approved the report you have to send them another 'final' report and a pdf with the OASIS number on the front or on the flysheet of the report before they will sign it off.
As long as you remember to get the postcode and square metreage before you start then it only takes 10 minutes or so to fill in once you've done a few (unless it's a big eval/exc I suppose).
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
just lost another one.... (doing them just now) will have to do it again! ....grrrrrrrrr
Constant development is the law of life, and a man who always tries to maintain his dogmas in order to appear consistent drives himself into a false position.
Mohandas Gandhi
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
so what is the process of validation? is it TCPA compliant?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2005
I'm so glad someone else brought up the issues around OASIS rather than me, having already had extensive correspondence with one curator and OASIS on the matter...
I get the impression that many HERs/SMRs do simply not have the resources to deal with a scheme that wasn't their idea in the first place.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
I am always thrown by the current land use question, the help for it gets excited about the maritime and I start thinking that maybe I should use coastland 3 but worry why they don?t have a hinterland but then I start getting really hung up as my current awareness of the site is that it is a training ground for jcb drivers where it appeared that there was every intention that next they were going to build a block of flats which they might have accomplished by the time I get around to filling the form, may be I should pop round to the site just to check it some how has not changed into a grassland or Other 13. I am facinated by the choice of open fresh water 1 and 2 but do worry that they have not considered close or closed not fresh water possibilites.
These people should go and work for eh.
Anyway better get back to pressing buttons with my eyes closed
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2006
I know, it's annoying when it times out.
I think councils should insist on it being done before they sign off conditions. It prevents archiving backlogs at least.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
Why would you want to prevent the archiving of backlogs?
I think that archaeologists should be able to put what ever report they like on and take it off when ever they like and all without any validation other than from their peers. I don?t understand why I should defer to a planning officer, a curator or some nationalistic self appointed only one standard look I have got a computer on what I consider to be archaeology. The point of the internet and digital for archaeology is that it is another form of dissemination and preservation of the record not validation. Still wondering what validation is.
