 
| Sender: |
|
| X-To: |
|
| Date: |
Sun, 11 Nov 2012 16:57:48 -0600 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Message-ID: |
<A0B9120355D74F329DFEA02ED2B64F22@USERF4FD2C72C5> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
| In-Reply-To: |
<12192725.25900.1352667208025.JavaMail.root@vznit170146> |
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
James:
Try visiting the Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory for their mapping
practices. Contact [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jim
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2012 2:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: best practices mapping accuracy
Fellow HistArchers:
I am a member of a committee established by the Council for Maryland
Archeology charged with the development of a white paper on best practices.
My particular charge is to identify the best practices in accurately and
precisely documenting the locations and boundaries of archaeological sites.
I have examined the standards and guidelines published for eight eastern
states and one western state in the USA. The words 'accuracy' and
'precision' are mentioned in only one or two and none offers guidance on the
matter other than investigators documenting the instrument and standard
error when using GPS units. I'm seeking input on best practices in mapping
site locations, boundaries, units, etc., with or without GPS units.
Discussion welcome.
Jim Gibb
James G. Gibb
Gibb Archaeological Consulting
2554 Carrollton Road
Annapolis, Maryland USA ?? 21403
443.482.9593 (Land) 410.693.3847 (Cell)
www.gibbarchaeology.net ? www.porttobacco.blogspot.com
|
|
|
