@Jack, I like your philosophy. I think in context of this thread, either lumping or splitting will pass muster, but a good, practical, general use philosophy to keep in mind.
Another general comment, I like seeing other's examples. They always give me a new way of looking at and considering things. In this case, I've never considered putting so much information in the description field. No reason, I just never considered it. However, there is potential big benefit to me there. When exporting to GEDCOM and importing somewhere else, often only the description is moved across using this technique. Back to the OP, I am getting the sense that most, if not all, of you would separate out multiple events from a single source (like a census). I'm not seeing a strong case for why it might be beneficial to do that over lumping subsequent/secondary facts into a paragraph in the notes. Perhaps this is more personal preference thing over any real cause and effect of deciding one way or the other. In the absence of a strong case for making separate events, I think I am still leaning toward a paragraph style lumped in the notes, or maybe expand my use of the description field. There is at least one instace in which I'd for sure break this rule. That would be what I'll call a first mention rule. If in my census example, if this were the first mention of my individual's occupation, military service, or even possible death date, I'd create those events and source with the census. Later, if I obtained a better source - military records or death cert - then I'd apply the new sources and potentially drop the census. Why all the fuss you may wonder? Well, to Legacy itself it doesn't really matter. But again when exporting GEDCOM and importing elsewhere, I've found that often a source is only pulled in once, and applied to the first event encountered. The results on the import side are that you get the NAME event very well sourced with maybe 20 more facts with no sources attached at all. As such, I'm rethinking how I've been attaching sources and adding events/facts. I've not worked it through yet, but thinking that each source likely has an associated more primary event. I'm playing with the idea of attaching these sources to only those primary events. For example, a census may include a name and birth, but it's primary event is a residence/location on a particular date in history. No, having just written that, I don't like the idea. I'd no longer be able to see either in Legacy or in any report that 5 census sources collaborate military service, for example. Ahh! integration/collaboration with third parties is way to hard! This is 2011! 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
