Ron Ferguson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Just a thought Connie. I do not > bother going into such detail with my > sourcing, but in the primary citation (ie. the one before > the subsequent) is > it rendered unnecessary because of the way it is printed? I wondered about that too, Ron, but did not take the time to read through the relevant section of EE to find out if there might be a reason it would be deliberately left out in the full citation. It makes no sense to me (and would be extremely rare; I can't remember an instance where I've seen it before in the literature) that something would appear in a subsequent citation that does not appear at all in the full citation. Abbreviations sometimes, yes, but they are abbreviations of things that are spelled out first in the first footnote. This may be one of the reasons I never use that template; I remember trying and rejecting it a long time ago. I prefer using ones where the online collection of images is the lead element. Connie Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
