Quantcast

Source references names and notes

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
32 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Greetings,

This is again about one of the areas which I simultaneous like the
most in GRAMPS (compared to others) and also the one with which I
struggle the most: source management, in particular the source and
source reference components.

I follow a single source -> multiple source references approach, which
means that I have a single Baptism Records of Parish Foobar and
multiple source references pointing there, with the log data and
number if applicable. I find this clean and logical.

One problem however is that it can sometimes be hard to pin exactly
which source reference is the one that actually includes a certain
information. A small example will make this clearer:

Generally civil birth records around here contain the age of both
parents. This means that this birth record is also a source for the
parents birth event. Sometimes the same happens with Church records.
So for a single person I can end up having around 4 different sources
for the birth event, including the most important one that refers
specifically to the individual.
When using source references all sources look similar, i.e. it is hard
to look at them and see "this is the birth record of X". After a while
this is a bit of a bore since I have to hunt down exactly what the
source reference actually means.

As a way to mitigate this I have been using the source reference note
field to add a note saying "This is the birth certificate of John
Doe". This at least makes it possible to know what the source refers
to, even if it still needs a lot of clicking to get there. This is
made worse if I need to add something to the source reference *after*
having already copied it to all the relevant events (say, a note as
above or the transcript of the source reference) given that all source
references are copies (understandably). I must find out every similar
reference and share the same note.

While I have no idea on how to make this last problem go away I was
thinking that it could perhaps be possible (or not, this is just an
idea) to show in the sources listing of an event an extra field to be
able to know that "Baptism Records of the Parish of Argh, Fls. 212, n.
45, Year 1820" is Johan Stewart Whatsisname birt record. I'm not sure
on how this could be made in terms of GEDCOM compatibility, or even if
at all.

Alternatively maybe this is not an issue to most, and maybe I'm doing
something wrong, in which case corrections would be welcomed ;)

Cheers,

Frederico Muñoz

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Benny Malengier


2009/4/6 Frederico Muñoz <[hidden email]>
Greetings,

This is again about one of the areas which I simultaneous like the
most in GRAMPS (compared to others) and also the one with which I
struggle the most: source management, in particular the source and
source reference components.

I follow a single source -> multiple source references approach, which
means that I have a single Baptism Records of Parish Foobar and
multiple source references pointing there, with the log data and
number if applicable. I find this clean and logical.

Yes. Source reference is about how to fine the info of the object in the source. So you should put there everything you need to find your info in the source: page, log date, share a note of the source with the sourceref, ...
At the moment, the list of sources in an object only lists the page of the sourceref.  You should interpret page broadly in my view, you can use it to list more info depending on your needs.


One problem however is that it can sometimes be hard to pin exactly
which source reference is the one that actually includes a certain
information. A small example will make this clearer:

Generally civil birth records around here contain the age of both
parents. This means that this birth record is also a source for the
parents birth event. Sometimes the same happens with Church records.
So for a single person I can end up having around 4 different sources
for the birth event, including the most important one that refers
specifically to the individual.
When using source references all sources look similar, i.e. it is hard
to look at them and see "this is the birth record of X". After a while
this is a bit of a bore since I have to hunt down exactly what the
source reference actually means.

I believe you say that sourceref needs a description. A running text to make clear what it references in the source. Do a feature request. You can misuse the page field to achieve it somewhat:
page 2 - section 4.1 descendants of John Doe
or
page 2 - birth record John Doe
or
page 2 - note 19090401: birth John Doe

The last in the idea that you organize the source with notes, every notes beginning with a line of the log date and the person it is about.

My point is just that the sourceref should contain the data needed to find info in the source. It is hard however to agree on what is needed to achieve that. At the moment page and date are given. The discussion should go about what extra is needed. We could try to be intelligent: if a note is present that is present also in the source, then display the first line of that note too. That looks like a difficult scheme however. Adding a description field the user uses as he likes is probably easier.

Benny
istinfo/gramps-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Hi,

On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Benny Malengier
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Yes. Source reference is about how to fine the info of the object in the
> source. So you should put there everything you need to find your info in the
> source: page, log date, share a note of the source with the sourceref, ...
> At the moment, the list of sources in an object only lists the page of the
> sourceref.  You should interpret page broadly in my view, you can use it to
> list more info depending on your needs.

Yes, I do that, I add whatever info I have, be it page, registry
number, folios, etc.

> I believe you say that sourceref needs a description.

Ehe, yes, that is an apt short version of my entire rambling ;)

> A running text to make
> clear what it references in the source. Do a feature request. You can misuse
> the page field to achieve it somewhat:
> page 2 - section 4.1 descendants of John Doe
> or
> page 2 - birth record John Doe
> or
> page 2 - note 19090401: birth John Doe
>

I will make a feature request then, I didn't do it yet since I wanted
to see if I was looking at it the wrong way. While possible I think
that adding that text to the page field is a bit "hackerish".

> My point is just that the sourceref should contain the data needed to find
> info in the source. It is hard however to agree on what is needed to achieve
> that. At the moment page and date are given. The discussion should go about
> what extra is needed. We could try to be intelligent: if a note is present
> that is present also in the source, then display the first line of that note
> too. That looks like a difficult scheme however. Adding a description field
> the user uses as he likes is probably easier.

I actually think that the source reference fields are fine as they
presently are in terms of the above purpose: finding the information
on the source. I don't have a need for anything new in that regard,
merely in terms of a more human-readable description to be able to
tell apart source references that end up being very similar. So it is
more of a cosmetic issue in the end, and a description field would
work perfectly, so I'll put that in the feature request.

I'll also search the existing feature request concerning a way to find
similar (i.e. "equal" in terms of actual reference information) source
references and perhaps "sync" them in some way. As I said adding a
transcript at a latter date is non-trivial given the possible
proliferation of the source reference.

Regards,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

jerome
>> I believe you say that sourceref needs a description.
>
> Ehe, yes, that is an apt short version of my entire rambling ;)

I sometimes use "Publication information" for adding the place, date of
the source (or others informations).
http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_source_2.png
http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_sourceref_2.png
http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_repository_2.png

It is OK for scanned or numerical sources, and I only use sourceref for
books (currently, often scanned). Maybe this was not the case 10 years
ago (GEDCOM 5.5) ?


Jérôme

Frederico Muñoz a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Benny Malengier
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Yes. Source reference is about how to fine the info of the object in the
>> source. So you should put there everything you need to find your info in the
>> source: page, log date, share a note of the source with the sourceref, ...
>> At the moment, the list of sources in an object only lists the page of the
>> sourceref.  You should interpret page broadly in my view, you can use it to
>> list more info depending on your needs.
>
> Yes, I do that, I add whatever info I have, be it page, registry
> number, folios, etc.
>
>> I believe you say that sourceref needs a description.
>
> Ehe, yes, that is an apt short version of my entire rambling ;)
>
>> A running text to make
>> clear what it references in the source. Do a feature request. You can misuse
>> the page field to achieve it somewhat:
>> page 2 - section 4.1 descendants of John Doe
>> or
>> page 2 - birth record John Doe
>> or
>> page 2 - note 19090401: birth John Doe
>>
>
> I will make a feature request then, I didn't do it yet since I wanted
> to see if I was looking at it the wrong way. While possible I think
> that adding that text to the page field is a bit "hackerish".
>
>> My point is just that the sourceref should contain the data needed to find
>> info in the source. It is hard however to agree on what is needed to achieve
>> that. At the moment page and date are given. The discussion should go about
>> what extra is needed. We could try to be intelligent: if a note is present
>> that is present also in the source, then display the first line of that note
>> too. That looks like a difficult scheme however. Adding a description field
>> the user uses as he likes is probably easier.
>
> I actually think that the source reference fields are fine as they
> presently are in terms of the above purpose: finding the information
> on the source. I don't have a need for anything new in that regard,
> merely in terms of a more human-readable description to be able to
> tell apart source references that end up being very similar. So it is
> more of a cosmetic issue in the end, and a description field would
> work perfectly, so I'll put that in the feature request.
>
> I'll also search the existing feature request concerning a way to find
> similar (i.e. "equal" in terms of actual reference information) source
> references and perhaps "sync" them in some way. As I said adding a
> transcript at a latter date is non-trivial given the possible
> proliferation of the source reference.
>
> Regards,
>
> Frederico
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Hi,

On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jérôme <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I sometimes use "Publication information" for adding the place, date of the
> source (or others informations).
> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_source_2.png
> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_sourceref_2.png
> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_repository_2.png
>
> It is OK for scanned or numerical sources, and I only use sourceref for
> books (currently, often scanned). Maybe this was not the case 10 years ago
> (GEDCOM 5.5) ?

Well, the main difference here is that we primarily use two different
ways of dealing with sources (as per another previous conversation
that we had): you mostly use the one-source-per-record approach, while
I use the one source reference per record, linking to the same source.
Mainly this mean some kind of a book, and 90% of my sources are books
in a way or another (Parish Records, etc).

The Public Information field is tied to the Source, and what I'm
lacking is something that applies to the different source references.

Regards,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

jerome

True, as source reference is unique between one source and (event,
person, media, place, attribute, association, name, address, etc ...).
Sourceref related to event will be well displayed on reports using
EndNotes, but there is still a sourceref management issue on other
primary or secondary objects !

I had added simple filter rules for matching Event having sourceref.
Maybe this could help you to manage your source references on Events :
http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=2831

Jérôme


Frederico Muñoz a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Jérôme <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I sometimes use "Publication information" for adding the place, date of the
>> source (or others informations).
>> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_source_2.png
>> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_sourceref_2.png
>> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Add_repository_2.png
>>
>> It is OK for scanned or numerical sources, and I only use sourceref for
>> books (currently, often scanned). Maybe this was not the case 10 years ago
>> (GEDCOM 5.5) ?
>
> Well, the main difference here is that we primarily use two different
> ways of dealing with sources (as per another previous conversation
> that we had): you mostly use the one-source-per-record approach, while
> I use the one source reference per record, linking to the same source.
> Mainly this mean some kind of a book, and 90% of my sources are books
> in a way or another (Parish Records, etc).
>
> The Public Information field is tied to the Source, and what I'm
> lacking is something that applies to the different source references.
>
> Regards,
>
> Frederico
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:
> High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
> Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Hi,

On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Jérôme <[hidden email]> wrote:
(...)
> I had added simple filter rules for matching Event having sourceref. Maybe
> this could help you to manage your source references on Events :
> http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=2831

Excellent, extremely useful indeed, especially given my extensive
usage of source references.

Many thanks!

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
In reply to this post by jerome
Hi,

Sorry to answer twice in a row.

On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Jérôme <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> True, as source reference is unique between one source and (event, person, media, place, attribute, association, name, address, etc ...). Sourceref related to event will > be well displayed on reports using EndNotes, but there is still a sourceref management issue on other primary or secondary objects !

I've been thinking and experimenting and I don't really see a way out
of it, I'm probably have to stop using my sourceref approach and just
put everything as a source, which I find clumsy and lacking in
elegance. Since sourcerefs can't be shared, only copied, it is
extremely difficult to keep track of them. I've just started adding
some transcriptions and I've been spending almost the same amout of
time writing the text as I do trying to find every single instance of
the source reference to share the note with the transcription. Very
error prone, very annoying and not worth the time in the end since
every time I need to correct something or add a note I have to repeat
the process again.

As I said in a genealogy review site I have actually tried some other
genealogy software and I think that GRAMPS has the best source
management, so this is not some "it sucks!" kind of comment :)

Maybe one way would be to adapt the filter that you wrote in a way
that I could find specific instances of a source reference, ideally
via a contextual menu of some kind. This could also be used as the
basis for some kind of "sync every source reference" action.

This are just wild ideas, I'm not sure if something better and more
elegant is being implemented. But as it is using source references
extensively (GRAMPS has made me very obsessed with adding the correct
sources and citations to everything) is something that doesn't work
very well... this sort of adds to my months-old thread concerning
images and sourcereferences: the "correct" way of doing things (which
I would like to use, since I find it superior in theory) finds some
obstacles in actual usage that hinder it.

I will of course file feature reports, I'm even looking through the
code and trying to come with something simple based on filters, but I
still think that this warrants some more in-depth discussion. I've
seen this two issues come up as the first "real" problems in at least
two different persons to which I introduced GRAMPS, and which are very
happy with it ("real" in the sense that they are not due to lack of
familiarity... they are actually the opposite, since GRAMPS induces
good practices in terms of source management which make them more
apparent)

Regards, and a Happy Easter to all,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

jerome
Hi,

As said before, source references on events are useful for publications,
books, papers, which will be like "bibliography references" on Reports.

Note, Gramps just deals with GEDCOM specifications ...
http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Sources_in_GRAMPS

Happy Easter,
Jérôme R.


Frederico Muñoz a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> Sorry to answer twice in a row.
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Jérôme <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> True, as source reference is unique between one source and (event, person, media, place, attribute, association, name, address, etc ...). Sourceref related to event will > be well displayed on reports using EndNotes, but there is still a sourceref management issue on other primary or secondary objects !
>
> I've been thinking and experimenting and I don't really see a way out
> of it, I'm probably have to stop using my sourceref approach and just
> put everything as a source, which I find clumsy and lacking in
> elegance. Since sourcerefs can't be shared, only copied, it is
> extremely difficult to keep track of them. I've just started adding
> some transcriptions and I've been spending almost the same amout of
> time writing the text as I do trying to find every single instance of
> the source reference to share the note with the transcription. Very
> error prone, very annoying and not worth the time in the end since
> every time I need to correct something or add a note I have to repeat
> the process again.
>
> As I said in a genealogy review site I have actually tried some other
> genealogy software and I think that GRAMPS has the best source
> management, so this is not some "it sucks!" kind of comment :)
>
> Maybe one way would be to adapt the filter that you wrote in a way
> that I could find specific instances of a source reference, ideally
> via a contextual menu of some kind. This could also be used as the
> basis for some kind of "sync every source reference" action.
>
> This are just wild ideas, I'm not sure if something better and more
> elegant is being implemented. But as it is using source references
> extensively (GRAMPS has made me very obsessed with adding the correct
> sources and citations to everything) is something that doesn't work
> very well... this sort of adds to my months-old thread concerning
> images and sourcereferences: the "correct" way of doing things (which
> I would like to use, since I find it superior in theory) finds some
> obstacles in actual usage that hinder it.
>
> I will of course file feature reports, I'm even looking through the
> code and trying to come with something simple based on filters, but I
> still think that this warrants some more in-depth discussion. I've
> seen this two issues come up as the first "real" problems in at least
> two different persons to which I introduced GRAMPS, and which are very
> happy with it ("real" in the sense that they are not due to lack of
> familiarity... they are actually the opposite, since GRAMPS induces
> good practices in terms of source management which make them more
> apparent)
>
> Regards, and a Happy Easter to all,
>
> Frederico
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:
> High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
> Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Hi,

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Jérôme <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As said before, source references on events are useful for publications,
> books, papers, which will be like "bibliography references" on Reports.

I see, but bear in mind that just as the example in the GRAMPS page (a
death certificate) books of some kind are in some countries the
backbone of almost all the information regarding events and the same
reference can be the source of severeal events. Which is why I will
start to migrate from my way of doing things to stop using source
references altogether (as it seems most people do anyway) given the
limitations I described.

> Note, Gramps just deals with GEDCOM specifications ...
> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Sources_in_GRAMPS

Of course, and to be honest the little experiments I made with some
other programs to see how they managed this were even worse. But
GEDCOM specifications wouldn't be I think an obstacle to having
something in place that would facilitate the "syncing" of source
references since in the end the GEDCOM output would not be affected,
merely the way the information in GRAMPS is treated.

Since this is not apparently something that bothers people I'm
probably the one doing something wrong, so as said I'll just stop
insisting on using the source reference approach and "promote" all my
source references to sources. It will look odd in reports but at least
the infrastructure is there to easily manage transcripts, notes,
images, etc.

Regards,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Benny Malengier


2009/4/10 Frederico Muñoz <[hidden email]>
Hi,

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Jérôme <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As said before, source references on events are useful for publications,
> books, papers, which will be like "bibliography references" on Reports.

I see, but bear in mind that just as the example in the GRAMPS page (a
death certificate) books of some kind are in some countries the
backbone of almost all the information regarding events and the same
reference can be the source of severeal events. Which is why I will
start to migrate from my way of doing things to stop using source
references altogether (as it seems most people do anyway) given the
limitations I described.

> Note, Gramps just deals with GEDCOM specifications ...
> http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Sources_in_GRAMPS

Of course, and to be honest the little experiments I made with some
other programs to see how they managed this were even worse. But
GEDCOM specifications wouldn't be I think an obstacle to having
something in place that would facilitate the "syncing" of source
references since in the end the GEDCOM output would not be affected,
merely the way the information in GRAMPS is treated.

Since this is not apparently something that bothers people I'm
probably the one doing something wrong, so as said I'll just stop
insisting on using the source reference approach and "promote" all my
source references to sources. It will look odd in reports but at least
the infrastructure is there to easily manage transcripts, notes,
images, etc.

In my view, the point is that source refs are unique and sources are shared. There is no other way to do this. However, the consequence is that you should not add data to the sourceref that is supposed to be shared. The sourceref should be used only to indicate where in the source the data concerning the person/event/.... can be found.
So if your source is a parish registry, you can make the subentries sources, or you can make them notes in your source using a numbering scheme you like. You should not use the sourcereferences however to hold data of the source entries. This data _must_ be present in the source. If you use notes to hold a birth entry, it is easy to share this note also in all sourceref. Alternatively, if a source is a log entry (as birth certificates), then the source ref only needs to contain the  log date, nothing else, and the information in the source must be done in such a way that this log entry can be easily found in the source. So the media object contains this date in the title, the Note has as first line this date, ....
Clearly, many people create a specific source per birth certificate and not for the entire parish registry. This is due to the fact that GRAMPS does not allow a source-subsource structure. That is, a scheme where a source has a field: parent source, indicating the source it is part of.

Benny


Regards,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Hi,

Many thanks for the feedback.

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Benny Malengier
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> In my view, the point is that source refs are unique and sources are shared.
> There is no other way to do this. However, the consequence is that you
> should not add data to the sourceref that is supposed to be shared. The
> sourceref should be used only to indicate where in the source the data
> concerning the person/event/.... can be found.

What mislead me then is that there is the possibility of adding things
like "transcript" and "source text" in the source reference - probably
something that is allowed since they are standard fields but not
really appropriate for a source reference. However I should point out
that other programs out there have two specific fields in the source
reference that seem to contradict this best-practice: they have a
"Source Text" and "Image" fields in the Source citation.

> So if your source is a parish registry, you can make the subentries sources,
> or you can make them notes in your source using a numbering scheme you like.
> You should not use the sourcereferences however to hold data of the source
> entries. This data _must_ be present in the source. If you use notes to hold
> a birth entry, it is easy to share this note also in all sourceref.

Well, easy is relative... I would have to find out every specific
reference made to share it. It is here that I mainly have problems
since it is a bit tedious. Any kind of sharing of notes is a manual
process in terms of finding the source references.

Point taken on the location of Source Text though, I'll start adding
them to the Sources. And then simply leave the source reference "as
is", without any note sharing or additions since that would mean that
if I at a latter date decided to add something I would have to track
down every source reference.

> Alternatively, if a source is a log entry (as birth certificates), then the
> source ref only needs to contain the  log date, nothing else, and the
> information in the source must be done in such a way that this log entry can
> be easily found in the source. So the media object contains this date in the
> title, the Note has as first line this date, ....

I sort of had that, then I decided to move things (apparently wrongly
so) to the source reference to make it easier to find. I think I will
revert to it then, as it is now I have more problems than before :)

> Clearly, many people create a specific source per birth certificate and not
> for the entire parish registry. This is due to the fact that GRAMPS does not
> allow a source-subsource structure. That is, a scheme where a source has a
> field: parent source, indicating the source it is part of.

GRAMPS or any of the other programs I tried, which I stress were not
at all "better" than GRAMPS so this isn't some kind of specific
limitation.

What I will do is to try to readjust what I have according to some of
the suggestions, I will do the following:

- Leave the Source References alone in terms of content, no notes
apart from a description-like note to indicate what they mean (as I
said in another thread this is useful for me to quickly relate a
reference to something more informational as "Birth Certificate of
John Doe").
- Add the source text as notes in the Source itself
- Add the images in the Source itself

In addition *maybe* share the Source Text notes with each source
reference... but this means that I would have to track them all down,
which is a bore and not really well supported. The only problem with
the above approach is that going from an Event to, say, the scanned
image that references involves several chained windows and some
clicking (Event->Source Reference->Source->Finding the image
"manually" by finding it in the Source Gallery), but it is better than
having to worry about having inconsistent data scattered by the
different instances of the same references.

Ideally I think that a program such as GRAMPS should simplify data
entering and as much as possible avoid the need of manually checking
consistency. This is, I see it now, more possible when adding
everything to the source and leave the source references as empty as
possible.

I will try to write something for the wiki about this.

Regards,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
In reply to this post by Frederico Munoz
Hello,

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Theo Tulley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Just joining in the conversation!
>
> I'm new to this having acquired a lot of information mainly from others'
> work, and only recently moved it into Gramps. I have until recently
> neglected to enter sources. Now I am gradually editing where appropriate, at
> the same time entering new data (persons).

Yes, you should tackle sources as soon as you can. After a while some
information is hard to remember :)

> To keep things simple, I use where possible single "sources" such as Birth
> certificate, or Parish record transcriptions. The former is entered if I
> have the certificate; the Place information supplements the latter. My
> Places do distinguish between a location and the parish church of that
> location. For some sources, the on-line collection specifies "xx's
> transcriptions" in addition to the parish; this is inserted as an additional
> source - but once quoted is an "existing source" in Gramps.


I've written in the wiki the way I deal with Sources and Repositories
(http://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Repositories_in_GRAMPS),
maybe this could help.

I generally use stuff like "Baptism Records of the Chuch of Argh" as
Source, then specifiy page/date in the source reference.

Somce sources are present in more than one media, and that is were I
use Repositories.

> I am using "Personal knowledge" for my immediate family.

I use "Oral Knowledge" as a Repository and then "Memory of John Doe"
as Source, using the date were I've collected the information as the
source reference. Just one of many different ways to handle it.

> Another generic
> source might be "Fiche" when I get better at reading them!

Ummm. a fiche in itself isn't a source, merely a medium... I mean, you
could have the exact same information on a fiche, a paper copy and a
scanned imaged. Furthermore many different and unrelated sources are
in fiches. A scanned image of page 2 of a Baptism Book and a fiche
that contains page 1 of said book have more in common that two fiches
from totally unrelated books.

> I guess that the details which can be entered in the upper half of the
> Source entry form in Gramps provide for detailed references to, e.g., IGI,
> or perhaps Court rolls, which will be valid only for a particular entry.

If you are referring to the Source Reference upper half they can
generally be applied to most "original" media (or even immaterial
things like oral knowledge), especially once one separates the
physical representation of a source with the source itself.

Regards,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Theo Tulley
Hi Frederico:

It seems to me that your method involves much unnecessary recording: If
a source is specified as Parish Transcripts then just which parish, and
the date, are already known from the data for which it is quoted a source.

On the other hand, if the source is only a transcript, possible errors
are implied and if questions arise the more accurate source - the actual
Parish record - may become accessible - it is a different source.

Similarly the identity of a fiche is already implicit in the data for
which it is quoted as source. It can be re-examined if questions arise,
or access to the original record may be sought.

Yours sincerely,
 
    Theo Tulley.
[hidden email]
SFHG Member No: 11619
<snip>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Theo Tulley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi Frederico:
>
> It seems to me that your method involves much unnecessary recording: If a
> source is specified as Parish Transcripts then just which parish, and the
> date, are already known from the data for which it is quoted a source.

I'm not sure I'm fully understanding your reasoning (my fault). I'm
thinking that the data you deal with must be very different from mine,
and if it works fine for you then that's another point in favour of
GRAMPS.

If I had a "Parish Transcripts" as a source this would make it nearly
impossible to properly identify sources. I have all sorts of different
Parishes, with different collections of books. I wouldn't know how to
use a "Parish Transcripts" source to correctly address all this.

One way to look at how useful is the source reference method is to
make a Narrative Website report and look at the bibliography
footnotes. If from what appears there one can easily see exactly where
the information is located then it is a good sign.

> On the other hand, if the source is only a transcript, possible errors are
> implied and if questions arise the more accurate source - the actual Parish
> record - may become accessible - it is a different source.

I guess this depends on the nature of the transcript, but it is a good
point. I sometimes have birth records which are transcripts of
Catholic church records. For them I use a different source since they
actually say "this is a transcript of the entry 12 of the Baptism
Books of year 1901, etc". They have their own entry number and year
and refer to a different set of sources (generally this is done by the
Civil Registry), so I add them just as I would do any other Civil
Record source. I also add the Baptism Books they refer to as a source
- even if I don't have the data myself - and add a source reference
that points to this "original" books in the event, with a note
explaining the situation (at least until I get my hands on this actual
source).

> Similarly the identity of a fiche is already implicit in the data for which
> it is quoted as source. It can be re-examined if questions arise, or access
> to the original record may be sought.

I do the same as the above: a fiche is almost never the actual source
but a specific representation of a source, most commonly a Parish Book
in my case. I add the Parish Books as the source and the fiche as a
Repository Reference - I do this for the LDS microfilms. This makes it
possible to separate the physical representation from the source and
if some other way of accessing it appears (a website that contains
scanned images for example) I can simply add it as a Repository.

Regards,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Michael Lightfoot-2
On Saturday 11 April 2009 04:31:09 Frederico Muñoz wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Theo Tulley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi Frederico:
> >
> > It seems to me that your method involves much unnecessary recording: If a
> > source is specified as Parish Transcripts then just which parish, and the
> > date, are already known from the data for which it is quoted a source.
>
> I'm not sure I'm fully understanding your reasoning (my fault). I'm
> thinking that the data you deal with must be very different from mine,
> and if it works fine for you then that's another point in favour of
> GRAMPS.
>
> If I had a "Parish Transcripts" as a source this would make it nearly
> impossible to properly identify sources. I have all sorts of different
> Parishes, with different collections of books. I wouldn't know how to
> use a "Parish Transcripts" source to correctly address all this.
>
Let me put my oar in here...

I use four levels of information:

Source Type
Source
Source Reference
Source Text (and sometimes other notes)

For example:

Source Type: 1851 British Census
Source: 1851 Census, Cornwall (FreeCEN but on it's own website)
Source Reference: A particular Piece, Enumeration District, Civil parish,
Folio and page in the Volume/page field with the census date in the date
field
Source Text Note: The actual text of the transcription of the particular
schedule

My reasoning is this.  I could use the standard "census" source type, but for
the U.K. I find that not specific enough.  There are several transcriptions
of these censuses (FreeCEN, Ancestry, FindMyPast, etc.)  so I naturally treat
these as separate sources. Where I am entering that data for a family, I
create a source reference with appropriate notes for the first family member
and then using the clipboard, copy that to the other family members or other
events as appropriate.  This replicates the source reference but shares the
notes (and of course the sources.)

Parish records are somewhat similar if there are several transcriptions
available (for example my own marriage transcriptions and the secondary
source of Phillimore's transcription).  Each of these transcriptions are
separate sources and each test of those sources is then attached to a source
reference.

This appears to work well in reports that I have produced so far.

--
====
Michael Lightfoot
Canberra, Australia
OPC Merther & St Breock, Cornwall
see http://www.cornwall-opc.org
[hidden email]
====

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Hi,

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Michael Lightfoot
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I use four levels of information:
>
> Source Type
> Source
> Source Reference
> Source Text (and sometimes other notes)
>
> For example:
>
> Source Type:    1851 British Census
> Source:         1851 Census, Cornwall (FreeCEN but on it's own website)
> Source Reference:       A particular Piece, Enumeration District, Civil parish,
> Folio and page in the Volume/page field with the census date in the date
> field
> Source Text Note:       The actual text of the transcription of the particular
> schedule

I do the same, with an added Repository Entry:

Repository: Parish of Belém
Source: Baptism Records of the Parish of Belém (linked to the above
repository, ideally with the book number in the "call" field)
Source Reference: Log date and page of the specific baptism record


> My reasoning is this.  I could use the standard "census" source type, but for
> the U.K. I find that not specific enough.  There are several transcriptions
> of these censuses (FreeCEN, Ancestry, FindMyPast, etc.)  so I naturally treat
> these as separate sources. Where I am entering that data for a family, I
> create a source reference with appropriate notes for the first family member
> and then using the clipboard, copy that to the other family members or other
> events as appropriate.  This replicates the source reference but shares the
> notes (and of course the sources.)

I do the same (use the clipboard and then add the source reference).
My main complaint was that if I somehow need to correct or add
something to the source reference I will have to manually track where
does the source reference appear to make the change. An example: I
decided to add a General Comment in Source References saying "Baptism
of John Doe" since source references can look rather cryptic when
looking at them. This means that I have to find out every source
reference. This could be made easier by filtering like Jerôme said.

> Parish records are somewhat similar if there are several transcriptions
> available (for example my own marriage transcriptions and the secondary
> source of Phillimore's transcription).  Each of these transcriptions are
> separate sources and each test of those sources is then attached to a source
> reference.

I agree and to the same if by transcriptions one means a document that
contains the information and refers to the original source. Say, like
a marriage paper. But I do not do that if we are talking about
different physical representations of the exact same thing: I do not
add a different source for a scanned image of Page 12 of a Book,
microfilm that shows page 12 of same book, and a paper copy of page 12
of the same book. To this end I use Repositories.

Regards,

Frederico

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Benny Malengier
In reply to this post by Frederico Munoz
2009/4/10, Frederico Muñoz <[hidden email]>:

> which is a bore and not really well supported. The only problem with
> the above approach is that going from an Event to, say, the scanned
> image that references involves several chained windows and some
> clicking (Event->Source Reference->Source->Finding the image
> "manually" by finding it in the Source Gallery), but it is better than
> having to worry about having inconsistent data scattered by the
> different instances of the same references.

You do not give the gramps programmers their due credit :-D
It is not
Event->Source Reference->Source->Finding the image
as source ref and source are shown at the same time, so as to avoid
this extra step.

I have always wanted to implement  some way to indicate in the source
what relates to the present sourceref a person is looking at (eg
bolder note/media/data). But I have not been able to think of a good
scheme that would not be too manual.
My ideas more go to implementing a subsource object, so that a source
can have subsources, and a sourceref can be to a source or to a
subsource then. The sourceview would then be as stacked view as the
person view is (source can be expanded to see subsources). If ideas
around this, please share.

Benny

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Benny Malengier
In reply to this post by Michael Lightfoot-2
2009/4/11, Michael Lightfoot <[hidden email]>:

> On Saturday 11 April 2009 04:31:09 Frederico Muñoz wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Theo Tulley <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Frederico:
>> >
>> > It seems to me that your method involves much unnecessary recording: If
>> > a
>> > source is specified as Parish Transcripts then just which parish, and
>> > the
>> > date, are already known from the data for which it is quoted a source.
>>
>> I'm not sure I'm fully understanding your reasoning (my fault). I'm
>> thinking that the data you deal with must be very different from mine,
>> and if it works fine for you then that's another point in favour of
>> GRAMPS.
>>
>> If I had a "Parish Transcripts" as a source this would make it nearly
>> impossible to properly identify sources. I have all sorts of different
>> Parishes, with different collections of books. I wouldn't know how to
>> use a "Parish Transcripts" source to correctly address all this.
>>
> Let me put my oar in here...
>
> I use four levels of information:
>
> Source Type
> Source
> Source Reference
> Source Text (and sometimes other notes)
>
> For example:
>
> Source Type: 1851 British Census
> Source: 1851 Census, Cornwall (FreeCEN but on it's own website)
> Source Reference: A particular Piece, Enumeration District, Civil parish,
> Folio and page in the Volume/page field with the census date in the date
> field
> Source Text Note: The actual text of the transcription of the particular
> schedule
>
> My reasoning is this.  I could use the standard "census" source type, but
> for
> the U.K. I find that not specific enough.  There are several transcriptions
> of these censuses (FreeCEN, Ancestry, FindMyPast, etc.)  so I naturally
> treat
> these as separate sources. Where I am entering that data for a family, I
> create a source reference with appropriate notes for the first family member
> and then using the clipboard, copy that to the other family members or other
> events as appropriate.  This replicates the source reference but shares the
> notes (and of course the sources.)

Yes, this is the approach I advocated by working with notes.  The fact
that since version 3.0 the source text note is a shared object takes
away most problems, as the note only needs to be changed once on
finding a typo. I believe this was one of the main reasons to make
notes shared objects in GRAMPS, and before 3.0 I strongly discouraged
this workflow (You might remember source text was a specific tab of
the source reference editor causing many people to make the mistake of
adding all info to source reference).

The problem is still there when you discover a mistake in the source
ref (page number), or want to add a note to these source references
(eg transcript of the original latin text). Then you need to track
down all source ref that where copies, and change them all. This is
why in my workflow I keep most notes in the source object, where the
media files (scans) also live. This is why I think about a subsource
implementation, it does not hurt the people who want to keep working
as they do now. The main thing holding such a thing back is GEDCOM
though. The more we deviate of that in GRAMPS, the more difficult to
map our internal data to something that can eg be uploaded to websites
logically as you want it. It is really hard to keep having to drag an
old and dead standard with us :-(

Benny

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Source references names and notes

Theo Tulley
What is the source reference for?

My presumption is that it is to enable the user to check in a source the
information for which it is quoted. To do this, the user already knows
the information provided; this will generally identify within a type of
source, the detailed specification of the actual source. Thus, if my
source reference is Census81 (which for me generally means a printed
page image) then recorded individual or family details identify the
location to which the census applies.

Similarly, recorded data identify a parish, and the source reference
specifies the church and the type of source - transcript, fiche or
direct view (i.e.personal traanscription).

I have yet to enter most of my sources: to minimize keystrokes, as far
as possible I want them to be shared "existing sources" in Gramps terms!
If I need to create new source references, they are designed to be
easily shared.

For what purposes is this policy inadequate?
Yours sincerely,
 
    Theo Tulley.
[hidden email]
SFHG Member No: 11619

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
12
Loading...