NFS wouldn't actually change information that you have added -- all they do is provide you with standardized locations from a drop down list so you can choose those instead of typing your own. It keeps place names with the correct spellings, gives the county name (which perhaps you didn't have before?) and keeps the spacing standard. It's not about forcing anyone to use a particular format, it's about providing a way to keep records of the same places using the same format and spelling. You never are required to choose from the dropdown list; you can always type in whatever you want. Of course they would like as much as possible to be standardized; so do we in our own files, right?
I can't imagine anyone more aware of the need for additional details or different ways to record information in unique sets of records than the NFS people. I think they have been in the genealogy business long enough to recognize the need to record unique details in all situations. For a lot of the general public, having the correct place names provided in a drop down list will be a welcome relief - we can only hope that they have done enough research to know not to just choose the first thing that pops up.... Kathy On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Alan Pereira <[email protected]>wrote: > Ron, this is why I wanted to see what my nFS entries would look like on the > Standard General Search web site, which does not yet show the nFS data. > It also why I wanted to see a Project Scope / Objectives so that I can at > least interpret that direction. i.e Am I wasting my time entering full > address details with full source material if nFS is going to rationalise / > standardise addresses in the future - losing the value which I am adding > painfully slowly as transfer of source material is only supported via gedcom > at present. > Alan Pereira > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ron Ferguson [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 15 June 2011 11:47 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] webinar comment > > Alan, > > With respect to English locations it is difficult to see which way nFS is > going to jump. If anything is clear it is that they have realised that the > American 4 field convention is useless, and inaccurate, when recording our > locations. I cannot understand why the full address is not given in their > records if only because standard practice is to record as much information > as possible. > > In general, I welcome the additional information which they are now > including in their transcriptions, however, they have a long way to go > before they can match the quality of the Parish Records which are published > by many local Family History Societies, details of which can be found in > UKBMD. > > Ron Ferguson > http://www.fergys.co.uk/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alan Pereira > Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 9:31 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] webinar comment > > An example of why it should be ignored is a grandfather of mine was born at > the address: 30 Little Camden Street, Camden Town, Middlesex, England > nFS wants to use: Camden Town, Middlesex, England > The real value of where my grandfather was born would be lost. > Similarly his christening was at: All Saints, St. Pancras, Camden Town, > Middlesex, England > nFS offers the Camden Town or St Pancras address in Middlesex, England and > loses the name of the Church where the event took place. > There is a case for using the generic location as suggested by nFS if the > full address was also available to researchers. As yet the web site for > general searches on the nFS data is not available so we will not know the > answer to that until it becomes so. > Another problem is that I am attaching sources to these events which > presume > the complete address is in place - the source also loses value if the > address is compromised. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kirsten Bowman [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 15 June 2011 02:31 > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] webinar comment > > > There's no question that genealogical practice recommends using the name of > the place as it was at the time of the event (and in the language of the > place, if you want to go that far). I'm just wondering how that and other > location issues that Legacy allows will integrate with FamilySearch's goal > to standardize data entry of locations. From an earlier response I gather > that the standard can be ignored, but what's the use of a standard that is > ignored--or does the standard perhaps somehow take into account the > situations mentioned? > > Kirsten > > -----Original Message----- > From: David C Abernathy [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 2:53 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] webinar comment > > > Since the records will reflect original (old) names, that is what I use. If > I know that there are new names/locations I will put that information in a > note. I do this with many entries, as the cities come and go, Counties, > State lines and territories disappear and change. The Countries are not > the > only thing that changes. > > Thanks, > David C Abernathy > Email disclaimers > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This message represents the official view of the voices in my head. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.SchmeckAbernathy.com <http://www.schmeckabernathy.com/> > == All outgoing and incoming mail is scanned by F-Prot Antivirus == > > From: Gene Adams [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 2:35 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] webinar comment > > Which brings up another issue. When you get back far enough, which is the > better means of identifying locations? The current "modern" standard > location as known today, or do you identify the location as it was known at > the time of the ancestor. What is the correct identity to be used? > You can place the correct lat/long for the location, but about the only > modern term that could be added is "Europe or Asia or Africa" for someone > unfamiliar with the various iterations over the centuries as political > entities graduated from the Roman or Byzantine Empires, through the various > feudal states and into the modern era. Which does the new family search > routines prefer? > > Gene A > > From: Kirsten Bowman <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 11:15 AM > Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] webinar comment > > > I certainly agree with Michele's comments. I also watched the webinars but > they raised more questions than answers, especially regarding locations. > There seem to be standardized LDS locations. How does that work with, say, > Upper Canada or Canada West (now Ontario), or American colonies like > Plymouth (later merged with Massachusetts)? Or Acadia when it was part of > New France? Does FamilySearch data entry want to see the placeholder > commas > that some of us dislike? And what about the "At Sea" entries, or "of" with > locations? There are surely even more complications with European > locations. > > I think we could almost use a whole webinar on Legacy location fields and > synchronizing them with FamilySearch for those who wish to plan ahead. > > Kirsten > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp<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<http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/Help.asp> > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and > on our blog > (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com<http://news.legacyfamilytree.com/> > ). > To unsubscribe: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp<http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp> > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp<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<http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/Help.asp> > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and > on our blog > (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com<http://news.legacyfamilytree.com/> > ). > To unsubscribe: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp<http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp> > > > -- Kathy Meyer Technology is both blessing and curse, depending on what it's doing for you (or to you) on any particular day. 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 Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
