Cemetery data handling
There is a great deal of data available to the project, from a set of disparate sources, shown schematically
here:
 The archaeological survey of monuments and graves carried out in the 1980s, updated in 1996 and
again in 2002. This records each of the monuments in categorized terms (ie by a taxonomy of
monument types, decorations, lettering methods, condition of monument etc), as text (ie the
complete text of all inscriptions), and as prosopography (a summary of the personal data contained
in the inscriptions). This is complemented by a digitized version of the cemetery outline plan. The
data items from this collection are shaded green on the schema above. Identification of items is
through an arbitary number managed by the outline plan.
 The cemetery's administrative record of burials and monuments (shaded in blue on the schema),
primarily related to locations within the cemetery bounds. Graves and their monuments are located
by row position with an area.
 The records of successive series of partial conservation exercises, starting in the early 1980s and
culminating in the present project (shaded yellow on the schema).
 Photographic records, most notably those of the Biblioteca Herziana.
 The immense amount of biographical information generally available about the people buried in
the cemetery.
The major problem with all the data records is that there is no unified way to refer to an object in the
cemetery. There is no one-to-one relationship between a burial (the act of digging a hole and putting in the
coffin of a named person), the erection of a monument (perhaps consisting of several parts, changing or
being added to over time), and the prosopographic existence of the person commemorated on a
monument. This is primarily because the cemetery no longer offers a permanent resting place, but re-uses
the graves in the majority of the area. Monuments can be moved amalgamated, and changed (ie new
inscriptions added) and graves can be extended or closed. The result is that we have allocated an important
phase in the project to data management and integration.
Project workpackages
System Design
Before any other work is started, the initial priority is to establish the parameters of the project; both in
terms of which data sources are to be amalgamated to form a single new database, and in terms of which
outputs are to be generated. At the least, the new system will be supporting:
 the detailed scholarly record of the monuments and their condition;
 the administrative functions of the cemetery; and
 a public-facing search and contribution site based mainly on personal names.
For all of these purposes, modelling of time and spatial dimensions is essential.
The archaeological records are currently held in an archival format of XML files against a customization
of the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org/), including polygon data making up the outline plan.
The target system will deliver XML data via web services for both textual and geolocating data, to offer
maximum flexibility for public and internal querying, update and annotation. Several different web-based
interfaces will be created for use by the different stakeholders, but this is not specified within the scope of
the current project.
The new system will be set up so that new monuments added to the cemetery will be included as they put
in place, rather than waiting for future surveys.
Task leader: Sebastian Rahtz
1
Task deliverables:
 dataflow diagrams covering all cemetery material
 comprehensive scheme for object identification
 specification of web-based systems
Database alignment
After agreement on the overall design, existing data sources need to be examined to find the points of
intersection. This will form the basis of creating a unified database by setting the rules by which records
will be considered to point the same object. The system will have two primary identifiers, a grid-based
location of objects (both monuments and burials), and an absolute numbering system for monumental
groups.
Task leader: Sebastian Rahtz
Task deliverables:
 implementation of identification scheme
 migration procedures specification
Database merging
The target of this work package is to complete the record alignment process in all databases, and transfer
the information to a common system.
Task leader: Sebastian Rahtz
Task deliverables:
 internal consistent database containing all information
Additional surveying
The current cemetery plan is essentially schematic, rather than giving a detailed survey of each grave, and
defines a set of coordinates outlining each monument. This example shows the detail provided:
This work package will bring the plan up to date, by locating new graves within the same system, and
aligning the arbitrary cemetery grid with absolute coordinates. The plan will then continue to be
maintained as a polygon associated with each monument group.
This work package will produce a report on the feasibility of a new survey of the cemetery in the future.
Task leader: Nicholas Stanley-Price
Task deliverables:
 digital plan in DXF or SVG format, correlated with latitude/longitude
 feasibility report on new survey
Identificatory photography
Although many of the more dramatic or important monuments have been photographed many times, there
is no formal record of each monument, and most of the existing photographs have not been digitized. This
workpackage will deliver at least one digital photograph of each monument, and will produce a report on
the feasibility of digitizing the existing photographic collection.
Task leader: Christine Payling
Task deliverables:
 at least one digital image for each monument, tied to database
2
 feasibility report on digitizing older photographs
Conservation survey
One of the main aims of this project is to assess the work needed to bring the stone monuments in the
cemetery into a state where ongoing planned maintenance is sustainable. This requires a preliminary reassessment of all stones and their location (the presence of many trees in the cemetery is a considerable
issue), and correlating this with the archaeological data (material, size etc) to draw up a scheme of work.
Task leader: Nicholas Stanley-Price
Task deliverables:
 consistent summary report on all monuments
 detailed recommendations for full conservation exercise
Monument record checking
This workpackage will check the archaeological survey of the 1980s. Each record will be checked against
the stone, and enhanced where needed; this will particularly apply to aspects of the record which may
affect conservation work, eg material type, lettering type, and monument type.
Task leader: Christine Payling
Task deliverables:
 each monument visited at least once and record checked
Monument record adding
Some 500-600 monuments added to the cemetery in the last 20 years have been surveyed, but not yet
digitized or merged into the main record. This workpackage involves digitizing these records, and
checking for monuments added since 2002.
Task leader: Sebastian Rahtz
Task deliverables:
 all monuments and graves added since 1996 added to database to same standard as 1984 survey
3