[Bell Historians] The ongoing evolution of Dove online

[Chris Pickford]

Andrew’s query usefully illustrates the difference between the “ringing data” side of Dove and the “heritage” aspects:

 

“So why do we collect turning data and canon data when information about the number of stairs/ladder etc would actually be useful?”

 

STAIRS: Yes, very useful from the ringing side (though how do you count them consistently?) [maybe for the heritage side too – but for Dove the primary focus would be on ringers’ needs]

 

CANONS AND TURNING are of little interest to ringers (unless for offering an instant explanation of why a bell might seem sluggish). 

Canons: (existence or not, and whether complete) IS important on the heritage side. 

Turning: I’m not sure (and have said so many times) that turning is really at all necessary – but I’d be interested to know if anyone feels strongly that it is!

 

For what it’s worth, I tried to make the case to a former CCCBR president that the ideal would be to have ONE bells database, but with two (or more) interfaces for users (e.g. a ringing based one for ringers and a historical one for heritage users). Editing rights could be assigned to experts in different areas (e.g. a ringer could be responsible for practice nights, toilets, stairs, trip-advisor type “ratings” etc. A bell expert would look after historical and metric data. The CBC could keep the “listing” data up to date). The core data (place names, dedications, geo-locations etc) would – very necessarily - be controlled centrally. 

 

I’m aware of other data applications of this sort – where those with the greatest interest in or need for the data take responsibility for maintaining parts of the whole. It works, because those with the requisite knowledge handle the bits where they have the expertise – and those who need the data have an interest in ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the information. Separate interfaces would help to ensure that users only get the data they’re interested in – not a lot of (to them) irrelevant rubbish (e.g. I don’t care about toilets when I’m looking bells up on the NBR)

 

I’m not sure I was either heard or understood! So this is a not too subtle attempt to float the idea again, and to a slightly wider audience

 

Chris Pickford

E-mail pickford5040 at gmail.com 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20200705/61ae0364/attachment-0001.html>