Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
27 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes

John W. Kitz-3
Dave, Jaran,

> On 2018-07-08 16:13, Dave Scheipers wrote:
>> Hi Jaran and John
>>
>> I did run another test and a citation attached to a place does get
>> included in the Complete Individual Report. I did not test it on other
>> reports.

Agreed, see the attachments that I sent you both off-list.

The attachments are one CIR (showing citations to an alternative name
and a place as well as to other things) and a small set of test data,
which, if I remember correctly, for the most part, came into being as
the result of several email exchanges I had with you in the past, that I
found to be helpful.

>> But this still does not address jaran's need to add citations to the
>> parts of the Place record. John, you included the citation to the
>> alternative name for the Person. Jaran wants it added to the Place
>> alternative name..

AFAIK, that is not possible, at least not in 4.2.5. I don't know about
later (a) release(s).

>> As I already posted, to get that ability, new code would need to be
>> written which as Ron points out probably will not occur or at least
>> soon.
>>
>> Other than that, I have no other ideas.
>>
>> Sorry, Dave

Regards, Jk.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes

GRAMPS - User mailing list
In reply to this post by Peter (chamdo4ever)



Hi All
Joined this thread late after being on holiday

Ron I 100% support Peter's comments, you are very helpful always
instructive even when being critical keep it up

Jaran
You asked a reasonable question, got an answer which basically said the
facility was not currently available so that you could either put in a
request for that facility or even write the code yourself
So now "we are flogging the dead horse" a debate on the who is right and
who is wrong on how we use Gramps or carry out research is pointless
because we all believe we are unique and correct and all of us are
generally proved to be right and wrong. That is the beauty and intrigue
in Genealogy

Regards
Phil
MLFHS 12583
Dumfries
On 09/07/2018 02:33, Peter (chamdo4ever) wrote:

> Ron, going back to when I was first migrating my data to Gramps, you
> went out of your way to try to be helpful to me. I recall you
> responding to me off list with some hyperspecific Linux terminal
> commands to help me in my conversion. Since then, your posts to this
> list have always been worth a look as far as I'm concerned -- I
> usually learn something and gain insight and perspective even if it
> isn't directly relevant to whatever I'm doing. As an aside, often your
> sense of humor brings a smile to my face as well.
>
> So thank you for all of the above, and your contributions to this list
> in general.
>
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM, Ron Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> List owners, please do something.  I replied off-list because some things
>> shouldn't be on-list, and [hidden email] is forcing things back on-list.
>>
>> On 07/08/2018 06:15 PM, StoltHD wrote:
>>
>> Ron Johnson !
>> I dont know who you are, but you do not add anything constructive to my
>> question !
>> You might not need what I ask for, others might !!! LIVE WITH IT !
>>
>> Im so tired of people like you, in Norway we call them Betterwissers, and
>> you are the type of person chasing people away from using Gramps.
>>
>> So can you please stop now !
>>
>>
>> Den man. 9. jul. 2018 kl. 00:50 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>
>>> Good job changing the subject!
>>>
>>> On 07/08/2018 05:28 PM, StoltHD wrote:
>>>
>>> It would be great if you just stopped commenting, because you bring
>>> nothing helpfull to this !
>>>
>>> If you dont' agree, just don't comment, if you have some real knowlegde,
>>> please share, but as of now, you are not helpfull and the comments you leave
>>> are anything but, only thing you do is negaively spamming a thread !
>>>
>>> Den søn. 8. jul. 2018 kl. 23:57 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your comment "Some people do more than just collect names for their
>>>> lineage-linked family tree." can be considered more than a bit
>>>> condescending.
>>>>
>>>> On 07/08/2018 02:20 PM, StoltHD wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well,
>>>> You don't see it, but I do.
>>>>
>>>> So just keep up the way you work, and let others do it more accurate or
>>>> in a different way.
>>>>
>>>> And then, if I ever should need any advice from you (don't think I will),
>>>> I will ask.
>>>> The advice or comment you have come with untill now is not very helpfull
>>>> !
>>>>
>>>> Den søn. 8. jul. 2018 kl. 21:07 skrev Ron Johnson
>>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07/08/2018 01:33 PM, StoltHD wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron Johnson
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe thats some of the problem, when you add a reference/citation to
>>>>> the place, it become general to the place, and you need to add
>>>>> notes/descriotions, to the reference to know where its actually belong.
>>>>>
>>>>> i.e. and reference to a source for the name of the capitol of Norway,
>>>>> Oslo, only apply for the city after 1928, before that the name was
>>>>> Christiania, and in the period of 1875 - 1928, "Kristiania" was also used.
>>>>> Therefore there might be important to use different sources (citations) for
>>>>> different part Alternative Names.
>>>>>
>>>>> The references/citations are the pointer to WHERE you found your
>>>>> information to that specific part of information...
>>>>> So the source for the Name Oslo, the Name Christiania and the Name
>>>>> Kristiania may in some cases be 3 different sources !
>>>>>
>>>>> Same with the "Enclosed by", you  may find that "Christiania" and
>>>>> "Kristiania" was enclosed by "Christiania amt", while "Oslo" was enclosed by
>>>>> first "Akershus fylke" and later "Oslo fylke".
>>>>> This different information might come from multiple sources and its
>>>>> critical to be able to link the sources to the correct part of information
>>>>> you have.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the same plot of land, so I don't see any problem with That Place
>>>>> having citations which call it Christiana. Kristiana and Oslo.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Some people do more than just collect names for their lineage-linked
>>>>> family tree.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A lot of people collect more than just names, and they don't seem to
>>>>> have this problem.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gramps-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>> https://gramps-project.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes

StoltHD
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
 - - - - - SOLVED WITHOUT SOLUTION - - - - -

I have got my answer, its not possible, I have done what Dave suggested, added this and a few other as Feature Request, and moving on looking for other Software Solution for this type of Research. 

Den man. 9. jul. 2018 kl. 10:43 skrev John W. Kitz <[hidden email]>:
Dave, Jaran,

> On 2018-07-08 16:13, Dave Scheipers wrote:
>> Hi Jaran and John
>>
>> I did run another test and a citation attached to a place does get
>> included in the Complete Individual Report. I did not test it on other
>> reports.

Agreed, see the attachments that I sent you both off-list.

The attachments are one CIR (showing citations to an alternative name
and a place as well as to other things) and a small set of test data,
which, if I remember correctly, for the most part, came into being as
the result of several email exchanges I had with you in the past, that I
found to be helpful.

>> But this still does not address jaran's need to add citations to the
>> parts of the Place record. John, you included the citation to the
>> alternative name for the Person. Jaran wants it added to the Place
>> alternative name..

AFAIK, that is not possible, at least not in 4.2.5. I don't know about
later (a) release(s).

>> As I already posted, to get that ability, new code would need to be
>> written which as Ron points out probably will not occur or at least
>> soon.
>>
>> Other than that, I have no other ideas.
>>
>> Sorry, Dave

Regards, Jk.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes

StoltHD
In reply to this post by GRAMPS - User mailing list
Strange that some people cant even stop when the thread starter have stated that the thread is closed without an solution, still some need to come with of topic comments...

And this was also the reason for why I stopped giving feedback for the testing of Gramps 5 Alpha and Beta.


Den man. 9. jul. 2018 kl. 11:27 skrev phil wharram via Gramps-users <[hidden email]>:



Hi All
Joined this thread late after being on holiday

Ron I 100% support Peter's comments, you are very helpful always
instructive even when being critical keep it up

Jaran
You asked a reasonable question, got an answer which basically said the
facility was not currently available so that you could either put in a
request for that facility or even write the code yourself
So now "we are flogging the dead horse" a debate on the who is right and
who is wrong on how we use Gramps or carry out research is pointless
because we all believe we are unique and correct and all of us are
generally proved to be right and wrong. That is the beauty and intrigue
in Genealogy

Regards
Phil
MLFHS 12583
Dumfries
On 09/07/2018 02:33, Peter (chamdo4ever) wrote:
> Ron, going back to when I was first migrating my data to Gramps, you
> went out of your way to try to be helpful to me. I recall you
> responding to me off list with some hyperspecific Linux terminal
> commands to help me in my conversion. Since then, your posts to this
> list have always been worth a look as far as I'm concerned -- I
> usually learn something and gain insight and perspective even if it
> isn't directly relevant to whatever I'm doing. As an aside, often your
> sense of humor brings a smile to my face as well.
>
> So thank you for all of the above, and your contributions to this list
> in general.
>
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM, Ron Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> List owners, please do something.  I replied off-list because some things
>> shouldn't be on-list, and [hidden email] is forcing things back on-list.
>>
>> On 07/08/2018 06:15 PM, StoltHD wrote:
>>
>> Ron Johnson !
>> I dont know who you are, but you do not add anything constructive to my
>> question !
>> You might not need what I ask for, others might !!! LIVE WITH IT !
>>
>> Im so tired of people like you, in Norway we call them Betterwissers, and
>> you are the type of person chasing people away from using Gramps.
>>
>> So can you please stop now !
>>
>>
>> Den man. 9. jul. 2018 kl. 00:50 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>
>>> Good job changing the subject!
>>>
>>> On 07/08/2018 05:28 PM, StoltHD wrote:
>>>
>>> It would be great if you just stopped commenting, because you bring
>>> nothing helpfull to this !
>>>
>>> If you dont' agree, just don't comment, if you have some real knowlegde,
>>> please share, but as of now, you are not helpfull and the comments you leave
>>> are anything but, only thing you do is negaively spamming a thread !
>>>
>>> Den søn. 8. jul. 2018 kl. 23:57 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your comment "Some people do more than just collect names for their
>>>> lineage-linked family tree." can be considered more than a bit
>>>> condescending.
>>>>
>>>> On 07/08/2018 02:20 PM, StoltHD wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well,
>>>> You don't see it, but I do.
>>>>
>>>> So just keep up the way you work, and let others do it more accurate or
>>>> in a different way.
>>>>
>>>> And then, if I ever should need any advice from you (don't think I will),
>>>> I will ask.
>>>> The advice or comment you have come with untill now is not very helpfull
>>>> !
>>>>
>>>> Den søn. 8. jul. 2018 kl. 21:07 skrev Ron Johnson
>>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07/08/2018 01:33 PM, StoltHD wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron Johnson
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe thats some of the problem, when you add a reference/citation to
>>>>> the place, it become general to the place, and you need to add
>>>>> notes/descriotions, to the reference to know where its actually belong.
>>>>>
>>>>> i.e. and reference to a source for the name of the capitol of Norway,
>>>>> Oslo, only apply for the city after 1928, before that the name was
>>>>> Christiania, and in the period of 1875 - 1928, "Kristiania" was also used.
>>>>> Therefore there might be important to use different sources (citations) for
>>>>> different part Alternative Names.
>>>>>
>>>>> The references/citations are the pointer to WHERE you found your
>>>>> information to that specific part of information...
>>>>> So the source for the Name Oslo, the Name Christiania and the Name
>>>>> Kristiania may in some cases be 3 different sources !
>>>>>
>>>>> Same with the "Enclosed by", you  may find that "Christiania" and
>>>>> "Kristiania" was enclosed by "Christiania amt", while "Oslo" was enclosed by
>>>>> first "Akershus fylke" and later "Oslo fylke".
>>>>> This different information might come from multiple sources and its
>>>>> critical to be able to link the sources to the correct part of information
>>>>> you have.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the same plot of land, so I don't see any problem with That Place
>>>>> having citations which call it Christiana. Kristiana and Oslo.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Some people do more than just collect names for their lineage-linked
>>>>> family tree.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A lot of people collect more than just names, and they don't seem to
>>>>> have this problem.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gramps-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>> https://gramps-project.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes

GRAMPS - User mailing list
In reply to this post by StoltHD
Actually, I was interested in the topic and was trying to ignore the jabs.

It is true the functionality is not supported. It is good that a 'feature request' was filed. It is great that some intends to learn to code for Gramps.

But an open, non-critical 'blue sky' discussion of any new feature can help avoid coding ourselves into a corner. The majority of the ideas in such a discussion will be dismissed. But even some of the most impractical ideas contains a useful nugget.

So, going back on topic...
I've been a bit frustrated with the alternate place names but couldn't envision a good resolution.

I liked that I could search for a historical name and it would find the modern entry. (Once I'd added Alternate Names and defined the eras.) But I wished that Gramps would have the option to tag an arbitrary Alternate name and prefer displaying that deprecated name for the event. It would HAVE to tag because there are often multiple names for a place in any given Era. Particularly for disputed territory.

Then again, it would be good to have the modern name also included in the verbose reports too... maybe even footnoting the obsolete/deprecated reference.

(How much cross-reference and clarification can be included before it adds noise & confusion?)

So here's an example: a 1877 source I'm citing mentions a historical placename for a birthplace and identifies the equivalent 1877 placename where the county & statelines had been redrawn. (And surveyed longitude/latitude & GPS coordinates have shifted/refined over the decades.) Add to complexity the 2018 town placename has changed & may be subdivided in the future.

So, to avoid recursively 'correcting' the place for the citation, it would be nice to have the original and 1877 placenames as 'hard' references to the date annotated alternative names and the modern to be a 'soft' placename. The 'hard' modern reference is just the place ID. This allows Gramps to always show the most current (or preferred) name.

I'm torn between wanting Gramps event views to show the date-shifted placenames or the modern placename. I keep era-specific maps to reduce confusion. I'm beginning to work on scaling Agee the for a map program so that a modern boundary overlays can be layered on top. Some geospacial map geeks have suggested that we might be able to do some time-keyed animation.

Hopefully, all your Gramps reports will be footer dated so that future genealogists will be able to reverse engineer your data.

Some places are more problematic.  What do you do with pre-WWII Berlin events? Maybe a 1950s citation says some ancestors were in West Germany when they were actually in East Germany. (When it was unwise in the US to suggest you might have had ancestors from a Communist country.)  The historical place 'Enclosed by' nation for Berlin may be straightforward. Annotating for misinterpretation is more complex.  

This is a similar problem to the problem of historical dates. It is difficult to tell if a date has been (accurately) corrected to Julian from Gregorian/Quaker date in a citation. (Being from Pennyslvania in the USA, Quaker dates are common in my genealogies.) It is more clear if they used the Gregorian/Julian  transitional notation (like 1767/8), old/new style notation, or original Quaker format (like 26 iv 1740 ; a.k.a. 26 4mo 1740).

Even then, it is difficult to be confident the 11day shift or the New Year month shift was accurately applied. (Remember when October was true to its Lation root and was the eighth month of the year?  I don't either!) Perhaps the citation did the 11day shift but not the New Year shift. So it's helpful to note the date cited and the corrected date. Also, noting a citation date that has been double-corrected helps isolate a source of error creep.

Likewise, some church gravestones were inscribed years later where the stonemasons used dates from church records. So, rather than being dated from birth to death, they are dated from baptism to funeral. Some genealogies will cite these as a 'written in stone' birth date! Then the online databases perpetuate such error.

Because of all these issues, I like to annotate the erroneous datapoint(s) and their source(s) so that the same errors don't creep back into my data.

For Quaker dates see http://ncgenweb.us/nc/guilford/quaker-dates/

And straying off-topic again, there's no horse so dead that you can't beat it a little more.
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 7/9/18, StoltHD <[hidden email]> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes
 To: [hidden email]
 Date: Monday, July 9, 2018, 5:16 AM
 
Strange that some people cant even stop when the thread starter have stated that the thread is closed without an solution, still some need to come with off topic comments...
 
And this was also the reason for why I stopped giving feedback for the testing of Gramps 5 Alpha and Beta.
 
 
 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes

Ron Johnson
In reply to this post by StoltHD

Have you tried date ranges in Places instead of Alternate Names?

On 07/09/2018 07:45 AM, Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users wrote:

> Actually, I was interested in the topic and was trying to ignore the jabs.
>
> It is true the functionality is not supported. It is good that a 'feature request' was filed. It is great that some intends to learn to code for Gramps.
>
> But an open, non-critical 'blue sky' discussion of any new feature can help avoid coding ourselves into a corner. The majority of the ideas in such a discussion will be dismissed. But even some of the most impractical ideas contains a useful nugget.
>
> So, going back on topic...
> I've been a bit frustrated with the alternate place names but couldn't envision a good resolution.
>
> I liked that I could search for a historical name and it would find the modern entry. (Once I'd added Alternate Names and defined the eras.) But I wished that Gramps would have the option to tag an arbitrary Alternate name and prefer displaying that deprecated name for the event. It would HAVE to tag because there are often multiple names for a place in any given Era. Particularly for disputed territory.
>
> Then again, it would be good to have the modern name also included in the verbose reports too... maybe even footnoting the obsolete/deprecated reference.
>
> (How much cross-reference and clarification can be included before it adds noise & confusion?)
>
> So here's an example: a 1877 source I'm citing mentions a historical placename for a birthplace and identifies the equivalent 1877 placename where the county & statelines had been redrawn. (And surveyed longitude/latitude & GPS coordinates have shifted/refined over the decades.) Add to complexity the 2018 town placename has changed & may be subdivided in the future.
>
> So, to avoid recursively 'correcting' the place for the citation, it would be nice to have the original and 1877 placenames as 'hard' references to the date annotated alternative names and the modern to be a 'soft' placename. The 'hard' modern reference is just the place ID. This allows Gramps to always show the most current (or preferred) name.
>
> I'm torn between wanting Gramps event views to show the date-shifted placenames or the modern placename. I keep era-specific maps to reduce confusion. I'm beginning to work on scaling Agee the for a map program so that a modern boundary overlays can be layered on top. Some geospacial map geeks have suggested that we might be able to do some time-keyed animation.
>
> Hopefully, all your Gramps reports will be footer dated so that future genealogists will be able to reverse engineer your data.
>
> Some places are more problematic.  What do you do with pre-WWII Berlin events? Maybe a 1950s citation says some ancestors were in West Germany when they were actually in East Germany. (When it was unwise in the US to suggest you might have had ancestors from a Communist country.)  The historical place 'Enclosed by' nation for Berlin may be straightforward. Annotating for misinterpretation is more complex.
>
> This is a similar problem to the problem of historical dates. It is difficult to tell if a date has been (accurately) corrected to Julian from Gregorian/Quaker date in a citation. (Being from Pennyslvania in the USA, Quaker dates are common in my genealogies.) It is more clear if they used the Gregorian/Julian  transitional notation (like 1767/8), old/new style notation, or original Quaker format (like 26 iv 1740 ; a.k.a. 26 4mo 1740).
>
> Even then, it is difficult to be confident the 11day shift or the New Year month shift was accurately applied. (Remember when October was true to its Lation root and was the eighth month of the year?  I don't either!) Perhaps the citation did the 11day shift but not the New Year shift. So it's helpful to note the date cited and the corrected date. Also, noting a citation date that has been double-corrected helps isolate a source of error creep.
>
> Likewise, some church gravestones were inscribed years later where the stonemasons used dates from church records. So, rather than being dated from birth to death, they are dated from baptism to funeral. Some genealogies will cite these as a 'written in stone' birth date! Then the online databases perpetuate such error.
>
> Because of all these issues, I like to annotate the erroneous datapoint(s) and their source(s) so that the same errors don't creep back into my data.
>
> For Quaker dates see http://ncgenweb.us/nc/guilford/quaker-dates/
>
> And straying off-topic again, there's no horse so dead that you can't beat it a little more.
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 7/9/18, StoltHD <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>   Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes
>   To: [hidden email]
>   Date: Monday, July 9, 2018, 5:16 AM
>  
> Strange that some people cant even stop when the thread starter have stated that the thread is closed without an solution, still some need to come with off topic comments...
>  
> And this was also the reason for why I stopped giving feedback for the testing of Gramps 5 Alpha and Beta.

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source Citations on Places Alternative Names and Place Notes

John W. Kitz-3
Ron,

On 2018-07-09 14:56, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Have you tried date ranges in Places instead of Alternate Names?

I guess you were asking Jaran and not me, but FYI with the help of Dave
I have and once I got it that worked like a charm. From that point
onward I however decided to first try and complete the tree itself,
which, for several reason that I'll not go into here, turns out to be a
lot more work than I thought when I first started doing this years ago,
and maybe at some later point in time revisit all my places to put them
into their proper historical context with the use of the date ranges
functionality.

>
> On 07/09/2018 07:45 AM, Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users wrote:
>> Actually, I was interested in the topic and was trying to ignore the
>> jabs.
>>
>> It is true the functionality is not supported. It is good that a
>> 'feature request' was filed. It is great that some intends to learn to
>> code for Gramps.
>>
>> But an open, non-critical 'blue sky' discussion of any new feature can
>> help avoid coding ourselves into a corner. The majority of the ideas
>> in such a discussion will be dismissed. But even some of the most
>> impractical ideas contains a useful nugget.
>>
>> So, going back on topic...
>> I've been a bit frustrated with the alternate place names but couldn't
>> envision a good resolution.
>>
>> I liked that I could search for a historical name and it would find
>> the modern entry. (Once I'd added Alternate Names and defined the
>> eras.) But I wished that Gramps would have the option to tag an
>> arbitrary Alternate name and prefer displaying that deprecated name
>> for the event. It would HAVE to tag because there are often multiple
>> names for a place in any given Era. Particularly for disputed
>> territory.
>>
>> Then again, it would be good to have the modern name also included in
>> the verbose reports too... maybe even footnoting the
>> obsolete/deprecated reference.
>>
>> (How much cross-reference and clarification can be included before it
>> adds noise & confusion?)
>>
>> So here's an example: a 1877 source I'm citing mentions a historical
>> placename for a birthplace and identifies the equivalent 1877
>> placename where the county & statelines had been redrawn. (And
>> surveyed longitude/latitude & GPS coordinates have shifted/refined
>> over the decades.) Add to complexity the 2018 town placename has
>> changed & may be subdivided in the future.
>>
>> So, to avoid recursively 'correcting' the place for the citation, it
>> would be nice to have the original and 1877 placenames as 'hard'
>> references to the date annotated alternative names and the modern to
>> be a 'soft' placename. The 'hard' modern reference is just the place
>> ID. This allows Gramps to always show the most current (or preferred)
>> name.
>>
>> I'm torn between wanting Gramps event views to show the date-shifted
>> placenames or the modern placename. I keep era-specific maps to reduce
>> confusion. I'm beginning to work on scaling Agee the for a map program
>> so that a modern boundary overlays can be layered on top. Some
>> geospacial map geeks have suggested that we might be able to do some
>> time-keyed animation.
>>
>> Hopefully, all your Gramps reports will be footer dated so that future
>> genealogists will be able to reverse engineer your data.
>>
>> Some places are more problematic.  What do you do with pre-WWII Berlin
>> events? Maybe a 1950s citation says some ancestors were in West
>> Germany when they were actually in East Germany. (When it was unwise
>> in the US to suggest you might have had ancestors from a Communist
>> country.)  The historical place 'Enclosed by' nation for Berlin may be
>> straightforward. Annotating for misinterpretation is more complex.
>>
>> This is a similar problem to the problem of historical dates. It is
>> difficult to tell if a date has been (accurately) corrected to Julian
>> from Gregorian/Quaker date in a citation. (Being from Pennyslvania in
>> the USA, Quaker dates are common in my genealogies.) It is more clear
>> if they used the Gregorian/Julian  transitional notation (like
>> 1767/8), old/new style notation, or original Quaker format (like 26 iv
>> 1740 ; a.k.a. 26 4mo 1740).
>>
>> Even then, it is difficult to be confident the 11day shift or the New
>> Year month shift was accurately applied. (Remember when October was
>> true to its Lation root and was the eighth month of the year?  I don't
>> either!) Perhaps the citation did the 11day shift but not the New Year
>> shift. So it's helpful to note the date cited and the corrected date.
>> Also, noting a citation date that has been double-corrected helps
>> isolate a source of error creep.
>>
>> Likewise, some church gravestones were inscribed years later where the
>> stonemasons used dates from church records. So, rather than being
>> dated from birth to death, they are dated from baptism to funeral.
>> Some genealogies will cite these as a 'written in stone' birth date!
>> Then the online databases perpetuate such error.
>>
>> Because of all these issues, I like to annotate the erroneous
>> datapoint(s) and their source(s) so that the same errors don't creep
>> back into my data.
>>

Regards, Jk.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
12