The Multi-Method Tool ‘PAST’ for Evaluating Cultural Routes in Historical Cities: Evidence from Cagliari, Italy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is about thematic paths or routs in historic cities aimed at heritage enhancement, by proposing the Cultural Path Assessment Tool (PAST) as a methodological framework for outlining a network of routes connecting cultural heritage “components”.
This methodology aims at supporting planning, design and decision-making processes for conservation and enhancement of historic urban landscapes.
The introduction include relevant references, providing a fairly adequate background on the main topics of the paper; however, it may sounds a bit risky the idea to assess the quality of urban space through numerical indicators or by “measuring” features, especially in historic centres. It should be explained from the beginning that street furniture, lighting, vehicular circulation, comfort, etc., i.e. elements that can be assessed for urban planning and design process are the main focus.
Section 2 “Literature Review” is not very easy to follow (it’s very easy to get lost) because it is full of definitions. Some tricks in the formatting (list points or schemas) could be useful to identify the main concepts and definitions.
The Methodology is not clearly explained; it is difficult to understand the description of steps and actions. Maybe a sort of diagram would help, before indicators table.
Please remove the section “Acknowledgement” (which has been kept with the template text).
In general, the English language should be improved, simplifying some syntax constructions and avoiding expressions literally translated from Italian.
Typos
Line 40: please correct in “the conservation and valorisation of cultural heritage emerge”;
Line 59: please correct in “According to Lynch, identity refers to recognizability of the object as a distinct element” (by adding “to” after “refers”);
Line 61: add a space before the squared parenthesis. This should be checked all over the paper: sometimes a space is missing before or after the parentheses or the end point: see reference 30, 44, line 297,
Line 117: please correct in “….the spatial layout [22–25]. Its aspect entails the relation between…”;
Line 201: please change “with respect to” into “concerning”;
Line 220: please correct “ad” in “and”;
Line 220-221: please remove the sentence “The area analysed is the Marina district in Cagliari, Italy” because it is a repetition. The area selected as case study has already been specified;
Line 229: please change “manifestations” into “features” or “expressions”;
Line 232: remove “destination”;
Line 234 and followings: it is not clear what NACH is. Please explain in a descriptive way (at least the first time it appears).
Author Response
Thank you for your comments. We made all the required changes and the replies to the revisions are in the attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
- Fig 1. Should be explained how was produced.
- The GIS and PPGIS has been extensively used and a reference to the value of GIS is suitable to quote e.g
- Neil Smith and Thomas Levy (2014) ARCHFIELD: a digital application for real time acquisition and dissemination – from the field to the virtual museum. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, Vol. 14, No 4, pp. 65-74.
- Kaimaris, D 2018. Ancient theaters in Greece and the contribution of geoinformatics to their macroscopic constructional features. SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 4, No. 3, 9-25 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1409800
- John N. Hatzopoulos, et al 2017, use of various surveying technologies to 3d digital mapping and modelling of cultural heritage structures for maintenance and restoration purposes: the tholos in Delphi, Greece . Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, Vol. 17 No 3, pp. 311-336 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1048937
- Georges Abou Diwan (2020) GIS-based comparative archaeological predictive models: a first application to iron age sites in the bekaa (Lebanon). Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry Vol. 20, No 2, pp. 143-158. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3819601
- The results presented in the article underline issues and objectives for interventions of urban renewal and regeneration aimed at increasing the usefulness of the culturally relevant paths and their structural importance as tools that organize the image of the historic urban landscape. The use of GIS was successful and also the s Space Syntax techniques and qualitative analysis. By inserting some updated use of GIS in cultural heritage environments this article is very worthy.
Author Response
Thank you for your observations and for your comments. We inserted in the attached file our comments to revisions
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Good quality paper, presenting a new method of assessing the cultural landscape and cultural heritage, based on an interesting combination of contemporary methods of research and visualisation technics.
The abstract is clear and properly describe the idea, place and topic. Methods and results are mentioned in the abstract as well, well explaining the matter and goals of the paper.
The introduction is well presented and shows the merit of a paper. In the part of the literature review, I suggest changing a title of section 2. adding words identifying inert and aim of the review. Selection of the case study convinced me. Maybe showing a couple of pictures from the site will improve an effect.
In the section of Methodology, I found the order of milestones, but the text is long and quite boring. In my opinion not only Table of sub-indicators, but the scheme of the whole designed research. What is part of qualitative methods, announced in the abstract and what is their connection with the quantitative part.
Results are highly interesting and well described. I like maps presenting the distribution of values. I do not know I understand properly all the correlations. Maybe it needs another scheme to be clearer.
Discussion is comprehensive, Authors referred their results and limitations of the method very broadly and comparing them to interesting sort of cited literature.
Author Response
Thank you for your comments. We changed as suggested our paper as it is possible to see in the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
