Source references names and notes

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

Re: Source references names and notes

Benny Malengier
2009/4/11, Theo Tulley <[hidden email]>:

> If I need to create new source references, they are designed to be
> easily shared.

Source references cannot be shared. They are the unique link between
one object (person/event/...) and a source. You should not use the
term  'shared' when speaking about source references. It are the
sources that are shared.
It is the same as an event reference, which holds the role the person
plays in an event. This role is also unique to that person.

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
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
In reply to this post by Benny Malengier
Hi,

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Benny Malengier
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> 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.

Apologies, you are of course correct. And while I know you were joking
do believe me when I give GRAMPS programmers all the credit that they
deserve, given that almost all my genealogy work is only possible due
to their effort.

> 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.

This is exactly what I would like. I'm happy now, given that I know
that what I was referring to is something that people are aware of as
something that could be useful, regardless of being implemented or
note due to difficulties in finding a good method.

> 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.

I can only visualize it by example. It sounds a nightmare in terms of
GEDCOM though  :)

To mitigate one of the problems I described - the need to track down
all identical sourcerefs to fix an error or add a note - one
possibility that wouldn't introduce any change to the program logic is
as I mentioned using filters to find the identical source references
and perhaps a Tool that doe a macro substitution of all of them. This
is I think perhaps the most simple way, and I'm trying to see if I can
work up something to that end.

That, and the feature request I opened concerning a description field
in the sourcerefs :)

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
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Theo Tulley
In reply to this post by Benny Malengier
Benny Malengier wrote:
> Source references cannot be shared. They are the unique link between
> one object (person/event/...) and a source. You should not use the
> term  'shared' when speaking about source references. It are the
> sources that are shared.
> It is the same as an event reference, which holds the role the person
> plays in an event. This role is also unique to that person.
>  
Thanks - obviously I was misusing the term. I was writing about sources.

That said, how necessary is a source reference (as above), generally? Is
not the information supplied by the context, as I outlined?

As you explain, they are unique to the person or event. So I am puzzled
by Frederico's need to access many duplicates.

Event references need to be edited to show brides or grooms - though
this seems obvious - what is missed if these entries are not made? I
propose in future to enter marriages only as family events, and the role
is family which appears to be the default.

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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Hi,


On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Theo Tulley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> As you explain, they are unique to the person or event. So I am puzzled
> by Frederico's need to access many duplicates.
>
> Event references need to be edited to show brides or grooms - though
> this seems obvious - what is missed if these entries are not made? I
> propose in future to enter marriages only as family events, and the role
> is family which appears to be the default.

I'll try to make it clearer why I personally have many (sometimes more
than 10, although typically 2 to 4) identical source references
scattered by different events on different individuals.

If I have a Civil Birth Record of some Registry in Lisbon for an
individual, that generally contains information about:

- The individual birth (obviously :) )
- An approximation of the year of birth of both parents (since it
records the age of the parents)
- The occupation of the parents
- Witnesses and godfather/godmother (and their occupations and place of birht)
- Marriage data (including the name of the spouse) and death record
for the individual, since they are added to the Birth Certificate.

So, as you can see, they are unique to the person but convey important
(sometimes crucial) information regarding other events and other
individuals.

Now, my Source Reference points to a Source called "Birth Records of
the 4th Civil Registry of Lisbon", with the Log Date being the date of
the record and the Volume/Page the number of the record and the page.
This works as intended in terms of saying exactly where I got the
information since the events point to something like:

"Birth Records of the 4th Civil Registry of Lisbon, Year 1913, Record
12, Page 4"

This is the source reference that I copy to the clipboard and then add
to any event that can be backed up by information contained in this
source reference.

With this being done any modification on the source reference (say, a
correction to the Page, or the sharing of a note) must be done
manually by finding every instance of the source reference since they
aren't shared, but copied. Modifying a source reference in a
particular event doesn't change any other "equal" source reference.

The impact of this is of course smaller or greater depending on how
one uses Sources and 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
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Theo Tulley
Frederico Mun~oz wrote:

<SNIP>

> I'll try to make it clearer why I personally have many (sometimes more
> than 10, although typically 2 to 4) identical source references
> scattered by different events on different individuals.
> <SNIP>
Very clear! You are luckier than I've been with the information in birth
records.

However I would still make the individual record a "shared" source (in
Gramps terminology), calling it "Birth certificate of Name1 Name2" -
then editing it would change the entries wherever you had copied it. It
would be easily located in the list of shared sources which appears when
you select one for use.
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Hello,


On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Theo Tulley <[hidden email]> wrote:
(...)
> Very clear! You are luckier than I've been with the information in birth
> records.

Well, this was an example only really applicable to civil records that
only began in the 20th century. Before that everything is in the
Catholic Church archives and the information is less, namely only
occupation of parents. YMMV since they are more diverse given the lack
of a central template, as it were. Other countries have more data in
Census, for example, which lends itself to different treatments as
well.

> However I would still make the individual record a "shared" source (in
> Gramps terminology), calling it "Birth certificate of Name1 Name2" - then
> editing it would change the entries wherever you had copied it. It would be
> easily located in the list of shared sources which appears when you select
> one for use.

What you mention is one of the two main approaches that I've seen
people using: one is what I've described, the other the "promotion" of
each record to a full-blown source as you mentioned, which has the
advantage of making it clearer exactly what the source is ("Birth
Record of Foo" is more immediately comprehensible than a Volume/Page
on a book) and making it easier to share the source reference since
every source only contains information related to each specific event
(so it is trivial to find the source text and scanned image).

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
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
In reply to this post by Benny Malengier
Hi,

Just another quick comment that have occurred to me:

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Benny Malengier
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> 2009/4/10, Frederico Muñoz <[hidden email]>:
(...)
> 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.

One thing that makes some sense to me is that assuming that all the
information is in the Source it would be nice (not saying possible...)
if the sourceref had a view of the parts of the Source that are
applicable to the reference.

When I say "view" I mean to say that it could be something that is
displayed by GRAMPS but that doesn't necessarily translate into an
actual relation, say, in terms of GEDCOM.

Taking you own example as a starting point:

- Source Text notes follow some well-defined criteria that allow one
to pinpoint them to a sourceref
- The same with the images

*If* there was a way to "codify" this "well-defined criteria" then in
the sourceref view the relevant material would be displayed. The
sourceref would act as a "filter" that would only show the relevant
information present in the source.

The main problem with this idea is that both Notes (including Source
Text) and the Gallery are non-keyed and have a free format. One would
either need to add some sort of "key-value" attributes for this to
work (even if merely discarded when converting from/to GEDCOM) or rely
on some sort of regexp matching on the notes and Media names.

The advantage would be that every problem associated with relating
(and maintaining the relation) sourcerefs with parts of the Source
would be solved; the disadvantage is that this is either hard to
implement or goes against the way things are done.

Just an idea though, even if very abstract and honestly lacking in
terms of knowing what it entails in terms of GRAMPS internals.

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
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Michael Lightfoot-2
In reply to this post by Frederico Munoz
On Sunday 12 April 2009 05:03:28 Frederico Muñoz wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Theo Tulley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> (...)
>
> > Very clear! You are luckier than I've been with the information in birth
> > records.
>
> Well, this was an example only really applicable to civil records that
> only began in the 20th century. Before that everything is in the
> Catholic Church archives and the information is less, namely only
> occupation of parents. YMMV since they are more diverse given the lack
> of a central template, as it were. Other countries have more data in
> Census, for example, which lends itself to different treatments as
> well.
>
I'll jump in again here and agree with Frederico on how sources and source
references are most useful in versions 3.0+.

A source is best expressed as a "bound" collection of information.  In English
records that I mostly deal with examples are a parish register (a book
originally kept in each church), an online index of births (such as FreeBMD),
a transcription of marriages (Phillimore's transcriptions done in the early
20th century), the recorded recollections of my father (I have "interviewed"
him about his life), personal communications with other researchers, and so
on.

A source reference is the actual entry in the source that contains the data
specific to the event.  Again in English records this might be the schedule
entry (one or more lines on a form) in a census, the entry in the parish
register, the line in the particular Phillimore volume, etc.  These are
specified in the source reference by the date and Volume/page fields.

The detail and quality of these various sources varies immensely.  This means
that a source reference may be used only once (such as a baptism in a very
old parish register which may contain nothing but the person's name and the
date), twice for a Phillimore entry (one for husband, one for wife) or many
times for a schedule entry in a census record (my gg-grandparents had 20
children and up to 10 of them occur in various census schedules.)  I also
occasionally have to use source references as the only reference to a person
(such as father in a marriage record for whom I have no other information.)

Because these source references aren't shared, I have had to chase down
references when I find a typo or want to add another note.

> > However I would still make the individual record a "shared" source (in
> > Gramps terminology), calling it "Birth certificate of Name1 Name2" - then
> > editing it would change the entries wherever you had copied it. It would
> > be easily located in the list of shared sources which appears when you
> > select one for use.
>
> What you mention is one of the two main approaches that I've seen
> people using: one is what I've described, the other the "promotion" of
> each record to a full-blown source as you mentioned, which has the
> advantage of making it clearer exactly what the source is ("Birth
> Record of Foo" is more immediately comprehensible than a Volume/Page
> on a book) and making it easier to share the source reference since
> every source only contains information related to each specific event
> (so it is trivial to find the source text and scanned image).
>
I have used this approach when I have a copy of a certificate such as an
English or Australian BMD certificate which is the original certificate or a
copy of the originally issued certificate.  I am at present reviewing this
approach because I potentially could end up with thousands of such sources
and therefore introduce unneeded complexity, especially when producing
reports.

--
====
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
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
In reply to this post by Frederico Munoz
> *If* there was a way to "codify" this "well-defined criteria" then in
> the sourceref view the relevant material would be displayed. The
> sourceref would act as a "filter" that would only show the relevant
> information present in the source.
> (bla bla bla)

While I still like this idea - and could be changed to something like
highlighting the image/notes in the source, etc. - I want to make it
clear that I'm not saying that sourcerefs should become "shared".

Having read the GEDCOM standard one particular note caught my eye:
source text in sourcerefs should be something only relevant to the
specific reference *and* event, something as short as one sentence.
This would in my examples be different for every event, so my "let's
just sync it all!" approach fails miserably, it is exactly like Benny
said (I never doubt it, was just looking at it from a different
perspective), everything related to the Source stays in the Source,
everything specific to the event and reference goes into the
reference.

As an example that could be potentially hopeful to others, the
complete source text of a specific page of a book goes into the
Source. The sourceref can have a "Source Text" note with a quick
citation like "... born here in the 12th of Mars 1843...", which is
entirely specific to the Birth event. My mistake was of always
thinking in terms of "reference", the term "citation" did change my
perception of it.

The above works wonderfully when using the Narrative Web report, which
is generally a good indication... the Source contains all the
(extensive) source text, and the individual pages just some small
snippets.

I still think that the following would be desirable though.

1) Quick way to find all identical sourcerefs
2) Some way to identify the images/notes in the source that are
relevant to the sourceref

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
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Frederico Munoz
Sorry all for the multiple messages, I've been experimenting,
exporting, importing, making reports, reading GEDCOM and trying to see
how it works.

I read this in the very beginning but only now have I saw it as
something that makes real sense (as opposed to something utilitarian
yet only done because of lack of better alternative)

Benny said:

>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:

I've been reading about it and it makes sense to put that description
in the source reference. Especially given that I found this:

----
EVENTS_RECORDED:=
             {Size=1:90}
  [<EVENT_ATTRIBUTE_TYPE> |
   <EVENTS_RECORDED>, <EVENT_ATTRIBUTE_TYPE>]
  An enumeration of the different kinds of events that were recorded
in a particular source. Each
  enumeration is separated by a comma. Such as a parish register of
births, deaths, and marriages would
  be BIRT, DEAT, MARR.
----

So, this answers a small discomfort I was having with my Source
definitions since I have "Baptism Records of the Parish of St. John",
even if the "baptism" part is something that has not direct relation
with the actual source (as I learned upon finding mixed books in
Parishes that contain baptism, wedding and death records
intermingled). Changing the Source to "Parish of St. John" makes it
perfectly natural do add in the source reference something like
"Baptism record of John, 1856, Pg. 13". This eliminates the need for
the "description" field I was talking about, and actually looks better
in reports (I was having duplicate TEXT entries).

Also, in terms of handling the different relevance of different
sources, I found this interesting:

--------
EVENT_TYPE_CITED_FROM:=
               {SIZE=1:15}
  [ <EVENT_ATTRIBUTE_TYPE> ]
  A code that indicates the type of event which was responsible for
the source entry being recorded. For
  example, if the entry was created to record a birth of a child, then
the type would be BIRT regardless
  of the assertions made from that record, such as the mother's name
or mother's birth date. This will
  allow a prioritized best view choice and a determination of the
certainty associated with the source
  used in asserting the cited fact.
--------

This would also aid in arranging the more relevant sources in some
kind of order.

After better analysing all of this - and reading the GEDCOM standard
closer was a big help in understanding why things are done the way
they are and why some suggestions are difficult or make little sense -
most of my doubts are answered, and much of what I said was due to a
misunderstanding on my part of the role of source references.

A way to find them and a way to identify images would still be good,
but other than that I'm actually happy now. I've changed several
records and the appearance of it is impecable and the more
event-orientated sourcerefs (with small citations supporting the
event, etc) are a big help.

If nothing else this conversations are a good way to learn all of
this, but my apologies if I wasted anybody's time!

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
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Theo Tulley
In reply to this post by Frederico Munoz
Frederico Mun~oz wrote:
> <snip> I still think that the following would be desirable though.
>
> 1) Quick way to find all identical sourcerefs
> 2) Some way to identify the images/notes in the source that are
> relevant to the sourceref
1) These can only apply to identical events, persons or families: can
there be any?
2) Surely these will be specified in the sourceref?

Admittedly, I scarcely use sourcerefs myself!
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Source references names and notes

Theo Tulley
In reply to this post by Frederico Munoz
Thanks for your response: very instructive.

Clearly our objectives are different. I try to keep my record simple and
compact. There are ~ 2000 names in my tree. I'm not contemplating
publication outside the family.

I can't imagine anyone not familiar with the family records wanting to
delve into sources.

If a source is NOT the expected source for the class of information
being referenced, I would enter it as a unique, not shared, source. In
such a case, it might require its own Sourceref. This  must be rare, so
should not result in searching.
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