“Uncovering progress in FOSS-based archaeology“, by M. Fioretti, in the title of an article published the other week in the trends section of NewsForge, the online newspaper for Linux and Opensource. If you are out of the know, like myself, FOSS is an acronym for “Free and Opensource Software”

As detailed by the author, archaeologists, with our large quantities of data, mapping needs, and repetitive analysis, are well suite for computer applications, but often, this usage does not extend beyond fancy PowerPoint slides. Community based, open and accessible software, as a model, is finely tuned to the needs of low budget institutions that desire to apply archaeology’s fundamental quantitative methods and replicate the analysis of others.

“Archaeological research is based on replicating and analyzing what others have done. That requires unrestricted access to both data and algorithms used to generate or process them — a philosophy that plays well with free software.”

As the author continues, they describe a few FOSS software packages that work well with the data and analysis requirements of archaeology. Software such as BRL-CAD and SAGA-GIS are mentioned, as well as, ArcheOS; which has been covered on GIS for Archaeology. Citing a presentation from the Arc-Team, at the GRASS UC in Genova 2006, Fioretti links to a presentation [pdf] and details the use of the Voxel graphic technique using GRASS and Paraview. This method gives the archaeologist the ability to recreate an excavated context and analyze specific attributes based on a 3D model. This is a very cool technique!

Discussion
The author hits the nail on the head by stating that “the biggest obstacle to open archaeology is data, rather than software.” As discussed here and elsewhere, archaeological data is extremely guarded by many researchers as well as government and private entities. In many states, there are very strict laws about how archaeological data can be displayed and distributed. As contract archaeologists, we are unable to share our data without the express permission of those who pay us to gather it. Even beyond that, once the data is submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office, the state laws take effect. Replicating complex analysis based on the available legal means of displaying, sharing, and transiting data rarely works. Most of the published information that archaeologists use to build their models has to be taken at face value because validating underlying data and methods is usually impossible For reasons such as this, archaeological literature is full of legacy errors that will never be overcome. Okay, I may be going a bit off topic here, but the point is, data availability is the gorilla in the room. Suggested by Fioretti, license agreements such as Creative of Science Commons could foster a more open archaeological data community, but a true fix requires much larger efforts. In the US, this would mean changing laws state by state and convincing archaeologists that sharing data within the community is a good thing.

This was a very refreshing article. The author is very astute in their understanding and description of the problems with the adoption of more open data sharing and computer techniques within the field. Further, the article provides a number of links to FOSS and archaeological software and products which may be of interest.

With the major tenants of the issue outlined, this article encourages the reader to think about how current movements in the FOSS community can be translated to the unique requirements of archaeological data. The gears of change are in motion.