And then one day you find ten years have got behind you from the first ArcheoFOSS edition. The impact of Open Source in archaeology has been surprisingly (?) limited, it have not been part of any radical development in how we conduct archaeology, and in the last years has suffered a loss of appeal among researchers and archaeologists. The use of open source software should have overcome the limitations dictated by software currently used, leading the use of computer applications in archaeology to match with the goals, needs, and aspirations of archaeologists. Open Source has had the possibility to create computer application not simply derived from proprietary software, but applications create appositely by and for archaeologists. This path was too often neglected. Why? Two main reasons can be identified. The first can be viewed in theory ladennes. Open source was a computer science issue, the transposition to archaeology was not associated with a strong theoretical approach. Open Source was not able to propose new development, new forms of doing archaeology, that include new ways, and standards, of handling, processing and modeling information. This is related to the insufficient recognition that the intersection of computer application and archaeology provides new paradigms and/or research venues. Open Source in archaeology goes beyond the mere application of software, in fact, it represents an area where archaeologists can focus on discussion about the nature of archaeological data, their definition, representation and manipulation. ArcheoFOSS seems on the point of losing this battle, just when a new nourishment, in form of a more theoretical approach, is coming from the introduction of open access and open data instances. The second reason is connected to education and formation. There is an absence of a proper academic curriculum: Open Source skills can’t be relegate solely in post-graduate courses. On the contrary, it’s necessary to provide future archaeologists with a level of competency both in archaeology and computer science such as to enable them to move from one discipline to another with ease, and to generate novel insight. Only proper training can permit them to engage in the development of new IT tools consonant with archaeological interests, and to foster a deeper conceptual understanding of how applications work as a necessary step towards the creation of new ones. The full benefits of Open Source would only be possible if such preparation is in place for archaeologists to reap the benefits themselves. No one told us when to run, did we miss the starting gun?

1. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology
failed?
Francesca Anichini – MAPPA Lab, University of Pisa
Gabriele Gattiglia – MAPPA Lab, University of Pisa

2. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
And then one day you find ten years have got
behind us…..
Introduction

3. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
What does FOSS means?

4. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
Global perspective
The impact of Open Source in archaeology has been
surprisingly (?) limited, it have not been part of any
radical development in how we conduct archaeology,
and in the last years has suffered a loss of appeal
among researchers and archaeologists.

5. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
• the use of open source software should have
overcome the limitations dictated by software
currently used, leading the use of computer
applications in archaeology to match with the
goals, needs, and aspirations of archaeologists.
• Open Source has had the possibility to create
computer application not simply derived from
proprietary software, but applications create
appositely by and for archaeologists.
• Open source has had the possibility to create a
collaborative community.
This path was too often neglected. Why?
Potentially…..

6. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
The first reason can be viewed in a poor
theoretical approach.
Open source is mainly a computer science issue,
and in archaeology it was dealt more with a
technical approach, than with a strong theoretical
approach.
There was an insufficient recognition of the fact
that the intersection of computer application and
archaeology can provide new paradigms and/or
research venues.
So the Open Source movement in archaeology
was not able to propose new development, new
forms of doing archaeology, that include new
ways, and standards, of handling, processing and
modeling information.

7. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
Open Source in archaeology should have gone
beyond the mere application of software, in fact, it
should have represented an area where
archaeologists should have focused on discussion
about the nature of archaeological data, their
definition, representation and manipulation.
The Open Source movement was not able to
create a wide community of practice, i.e. a group
of people:
• who share a profession, or has a common
interest in a particular domain,
• who shares information and experiences that
the members learn from each other to develop
themselves personally and professionally

8. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
We can summarise the concept with the fact that
the number of archaeologists that shares code
is yet too small!!

9. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
The second reason is connected to education and
training:
there is an absence of a proper academic curriculum.
On the contrary, it’s necessary to give future
archaeologists the possibility to reach a level of
competency in computer science such as to enable
them to generate novel insight. Only proper training
can permit them to engage in the development of new
IT tools consonant with archaeological interests, and to
foster a deeper conceptual understanding of how
applications work as a necessary step towards the
creation of new ones.
The full benefits of Open Source would only be
possible if such preparation is in place for
archaeologists to reap the benefits themselves.

10. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
A third reason is the
fact that too often has
been emphasised the
F for free.
Open source has
become economically
advantageous for
poorly funded
archaeologist, but has
not become a core
element of
archaeology.

11. #epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?
ArcheoFOSS seems on the point of losing this
battle, just when a new nourishment, in form of
a more theoretical approach, is coming from
the introduction of open access and open data
instances.

12. Will Open Data
in Archaeology
be the next
#epicfail?
#epicfail? Has Open Source in archaeology failed?

13. Thank you
Gabriele Gattiglia
gabriele.gattiglia@for.unipi.it
@g_gattiglia
http://pisa.academia.edu/GabrieleGattiglia
Francesca Anichini
francesca.anichini@for.unipi.it
@FrAnichini
https://pisa.academia.edu/FrancescaAnichini
Preserving Italian archaeological open data: the MOD solution.