CAA-N 2026

Inom Swedigarch har vi publicerat en hel del data inom modulen AGES – Archaeological Geodata from Excavations. Nu arbetar vi med att göra den informationen mer tillgänglig och användbar för olika användare. Samtidigt utforskar vi förutsättningarna för att data ska kunna hanteras mer effektivt direkt från undersökningar, och vara mer FAIR-anpassade. Inom ett samarbetsprojekt för de omfattande undersökningarna för Ostlänken kommer det behöva konkretiseras till tekniska specifikationer som förbereder för avancerade Länkad Öppen Data-lösningar, samtidigt som det måste vara praktiskt genomförbart i alla led.

UniMus:Kultur-samarbeidet har hatt to treårige prosjektperioder og neste prosjektperiode starter over nyttår. I den første perioden ble gjenstandsbasene for arkeologi, etnografi og numismatikk overført fra MUSIT-baser til postgresbaser med nettbaserte brukergrensesnitt. Datamodellen bygger fortsatt på CIDOC-CRM i og med at den er hendelsesorientert. I den andre perioden ble løsninger for magasin og analyser integrert i gjenstandsbasene. Nå i 2026 konsentrerer arbeidet seg om DAMS (Digital Asset Management System), ny løsning for arkiv og fotobase.

I neste periode vil det bli en del endringer av omfanget fordi de naturhistoriske museene migrerer sine baser til Specify.

I neste periode vil arbeidet med arkiv og foto ferdigstilles, og det skal utvikles gode løsninger for arkivering av andre formater. Arkivering av 3D-formater gjør det også aktuelt å arkivere mer paradata – data om hvordan metadataene er skapt.

Delph (arbetsnamn) är Statens historiska museers databas för sökning i 6 000 avslutade arkeologiska projekt. Databasen och sökverktyget har utvecklats av Sebastian Liahaugen på Arkeologerna. Arbetet pågår. Nästa steg är ett lager som kopplar databasens flera tusen definitioner till CIDOC CRM. Då visar en sökning även hur materialet har undersökts, dokumenterats och samlats in, på ett sätt som underlättar källkritiska aspekter.

Integrating archaeological data across different software systems involves more than simply transforming one data schema into another. Intrasis, a GIS-based system for archaeological excavation documentation, supports user-defined metadata templates that allow projects to configure object classes, subclasses, attributes, and relationships. ADED, on the other hand, uses a standardized schema to make archaeological data accessible, comparable, and reusable across projects. Bringing these different approaches together presents several challenges, particularly in mapping metadata, handling identifiers, maintaining dependencies between records, and preserving relationships between archaeological objects.

This presentation explores these challenges and the solutions developed through work on the Intrasis–ADED integration pipeline. It examines how differences in project-specific documentation models affect data transformation, how changes to identifiers and metadata definitions can impact related records, and why a successful pipeline run does not necessarily mean that all source data has been transferred correctly. It also discusses how validation and quality checks help identify incomplete mappings, missing information, and potential data loss.

By examining these challenges and the approaches used to address them, this work highlights the practical requirements for bringing heterogeneous archaeological documentation into a shared data infrastructure and making it reliable and useful for cross-project analysis and long-term reuse.

Fragile tools, obsolescence, exploding data volumes, maintenance costs, interoperability, long-term sustainability: in our experience, the challenges commonly raised about archaeological information systems stem less from individual tools than from the breaks between them. Every transfer from one program or database to another is a point of re-entry, data loss and dependency. ArcheoBase removes these breaks by bringing together, in a single environment, a user-configurable database, a GIS, a vector drawing tool, the Harris matrix, photo and document management, a publication tool, finds-depot management and the laboratory. ArcheoBase was born in 2020 from a survey of 14 cantonal archaeological services and 3 Swiss universities, in a country with differing recording methods and four languages. We chose to build a cross-cutting and flexible tool: cross-cutting, because it covers the entire workflow; flexible, because it adapts to each institution’s methodology and vocabulary.

This presentation shows what a fully integrated information workflow brings, drawing on the experience of a cantonal authority: the Archaeological Service of the State of Fribourg, whose staff and budget have remained constant while the number of operations it carries out each year has increased tenfold over 20 years. This case highlights the issues specific to the framework conditions of a state service, mandate, scope, economic climate, volumes, efficiency and accountability and how ArcheoBase helps build confidence in the future.

Each of these challenges is met by a concrete mechanism. Fragility and maintenance costs: no local installation, continuous updates included, redundant hosting in two data centres in Switzerland, daily backups locked against deletion, operation over weak mobile or satellite connections, and a native offline mode in 2027. Volume: examples range from 3,000 archaeological perimeters to the actual biggest archaeological excavation site in Prés-de-Vidy (Lausanne 8 ha), where more than 40 synchronised users have produced over 4,800 stratigraphic units, 19,500 finds and 12,400 photographs; some organisations exceed 100 concurrent users. Obsolescence: the migration, at Avenches, of a 250-grave cemetery whose records had passed through paper, Excel, FileMaker and Access. Interoperability: one WFS service per form type to QGIS and ArcGIS, cadastral and historical layers called via WMS/WFS, a REST API, Shapefile, GeoJSON and CSV imports, OpenID Connect authentication and, soon, the alignment of every field with the CIDOC-CRM ontology. Long-term sustainability: full export at any time, in standard formats that preserve relational identifiers, automated backups to the institution’s own infrastructure, and contractual data return. Scientific integrity, for its part, rests on attributed, time-stamped and reversible actions; open science rests on a FAIR-compliant publication module, demonstrated by the Archaeology Switzerland portal: 6,900 chronicle entries in open access and 14,000 older records being retro-digitised, harvested by the European research infrastructure ARIADNE.

The code is not open, but the data are, if the user so wishes (exports, API). Choosing closed code is an economic decision: a subscription of around twenty euros per user per month, decreasing with the number of users, covers full infrastructure management (hosting, storage, backups, high availability and updates) so the institution has no hardware to buy, no IT staff to assign and no other costs. This subscription, free for students and adjusted to each country’s economic situation, funds a stable, continuously developed infrastructure without depending on project grants. These choices will be discussed openly.

Keywords: archaeological information system · integrated workflow · Harris matrix · GIS · FAIR · CIDOC-CRM · data reversibility · lessons learned · archaeological database

Sammendrag kommer / Abstract pending.

För 10 år sedan gjordes på Vasamuseet en utredning kring ett förvaltningsverktyg för det välbevarade 1600-tals skeppet. Målet var att samla ihop all dokumentation på ett ställe och även kunna visualisera lägesbunden information tillsammans med en 3D-modell av skeppet. För förvaltningsverktyget valdes Intrasis som var väletablerat, med en kompetent databas designad för att länka många olika typer av information. Dock saknade Intrasis 3d-fönster vilket utvecklades för att kunna visualisera Vasa och annan lägesbunden information. Nu är det ju sällan som saker går precis som man tänkt och så även i detta fall. Förvaltningsverktyget, numera kallat VASABAS, har sedan några år börjat användas men eftersom hela Föremålsenheten på Vasamuseet är upptagen med att byta ut skeppets stödkonstruktion går det trögt att fylla på information. Den här presentationen är ändå tänkt att visa ett alternativt användningsområde av Intrasis och hur man på ett enkelt sätt kan visualisera data i Intrasis databas med tredjepartsprodukter som Grafana.

Fysisk oppmaling eller kritting av bergkunst i Norge avvikles. Dette skaper behov for alternative løsninger for å gjøre bergkunsten synlig for dokumentasjon, forskning og formidling. Innenfor FoU-prosjektet «Digital oppmaling av bergkunst i 3D» utvikler Kulturhistorisk museum sammen med Østfold fylkeskommune en digital arbeidsflyt for å lage virtuelle krittinger. Presentasjonen tar for seg den delen av arbeidsflyten som gjelder bruk av 2,5D-data fra 3D-skanning og fotogrammetri, behandlet i en GIS-pipeline.

The rapid improvement in how digital data in archaeology are accessed and produced brings, on the one hand, significant democratisation in the use of these powerful tools. On the other hand, it provides a foundation for a more thorough and reflexive interpretation of 3D data. While 3D modelling, at first glance, seems scientific per se, its true research potential is revealed only after 3D documentation is complete and undergoes further processing.

However, the processing stage is never linear and often raises more questions than answers, especially regarding data representation, informativeness, and the ability to be successfully extrapolated to larger datasets. To what extent can 3D data cope with research questions that we aim to answer using these methods? Is digital modelling the most rational and sustainable way to answer them? How can it be paired with other digital recording techniques?

This talk aims to unpack the relationship between 3D documentation, the technological study of portable art, and other digital recording techniques within a single research framework. Building on the challenges of the TEMPA-3D research project, it reflects on the limitations of 3D studies of portable art and examines the potential to overcome them. TEMPA 3D revealed three approaches to enhance 3D data and maximise output: a “reciprocation” approach paired with experimental archaeology or field research; a multiscale use of 3D data, from microSfM to regular photogrammetric setups; a combination of SfM with a variety of 2D imaging techniques. This approach effectively challenges the idea of 3D documentation as a self-standing means of comprehensive technological assessment of surface modifications, especially for small artefacts and portable art objects.

1. Unchanged.

2. Unchanged.

3. Membership of CAA-N is open to anyone, free of charge, and does not include membership of the international CAA. Members wishing to attend the international CAA conference must join that organisation separately, per its own constitution, published at https://caa-international.org/. Members are entitled to:
a) be kept on the CAA-N mailing list,
b) receive all mailings,
c) vote at general meetings.

CAA-N is self-financing.

4.
i) CAA-N shall be administered by a board of three to eight members.
ii) Board members are elected biennially at the CAA-N meeting (BGM).
iii) If a board seat becomes vacant between BGMs, the remaining board members may co-opt a replacement to serve until the next BGM.
iv) One board member is designated by the board as CAA-N’s representative to CAA International.
v) At least one board member must hold current individual membership of CAA International.

5. Unchanged.

6. Unchanged.

7.
i) Notice of a General Meeting, with any proposals for discussion – including proposed constitutional changes – must be sent to the mailing list at least 14 days before the meeting. A copy should also be posted on the website where practical.
ii) Normally the BGM is held at the annual conference. Attendance is open to all CAA-N members, whether or not attending the conference. The meeting may be held in person, online, or hybrid.
iii) Board elections take place at the BGM, normally by show of hands. Nominations can be submitted to the sitting board in advance, or made from the floor at the meeting itself, provided the candidate confirms their willingness to stand.
iv) If the BGM cannot be held at the annual conference, the board shall call one as soon as possible, respecting the notice period above.

8. Changes to this constitution require a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote at a BGM, and take effect upon approval or upon ratification by the CAA International AGM, if such ratification is required under the CAA International constitution – whichever applies.

Gjeldende statutter: https://no.caa-international.org/statutter/. Spørsmål kan rettes til styret før møtet.