Michele and Bernhard, I couldn't agree more. Why use the street address in any location when Legacy has an address section available for all events, individuals, marriages etc? Using the full address just increases the size of the master location list unnecessarily. If one had say 10,000 individuals in theory the location list could be hold many 1,000s of addresses with a good many being the same village, town or city. Geo location is available on all addresses for those who like to use it.
Thought I'd take the opportunity to expend this thread into Addresses, and have renamed it to reflect that. The only problem I have with using addresses for individual events, such as a birth address, is that the individuals name isn't filled in automatically; it is if adding an address to the actual individual through their edit screen. I think this is an oversight by the programmers which I have reported in the past to which Sherry replied: "As for the Event Addresses, how would the program know what to enter as the "name" for the Event Address? For example, if it's an Occupation event, I have showing the person's occupation in the Description field, but that wouldn't be appropriate for the address if I wanted to enter the address of the company the person worked for." The name box of the event is surely the individual even in Sherry's example; it is the individual that the address relates to even if it is a company address, Legacy is a database of individuals after all. If the name isn't input as the individual then finding the correct address in the Address Master List is virtually impossible as the list doesn't show any link a specific individual although it does have a 'Show List' button. In Sherry's example, there could be several persons with the same company address. Additionally and even worse, if an address is input without the name box completed, Legacy simply puts n/a as a name which appears in the Master Address list, not at all helpful. Any address should relate to an individual except for a marriage when it's obviously two; even the address screen for marriages could have the name box filled in with the name of one of the individuals - it initially doesn't matter which. Geoff U. ----------------------- -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 1:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Locations Bernhard, I am a little confused. Are you putting eery ADDRESS in as a separate location? 42 Main Street, Purvis, Lamar, Mississippi, USA 15 Elm Street, Purvis, Lamar, Mississippi, USA 84 Oak Street, Purvis, Lamar, Mississippi, USA Why not just put the exact address, if you have one, under a residence event or if it is tied to a census, within the census event notes? For example, if I get an exact address from a WWII draft card I just write the address within that event notes. What is the purpose of geo locating 50 exact addresses in Los Angeles? For research purposes, you only need to know that they lived in Los Angeles. I think this just clutters up your master locations. michele -----Original Message----- From: Bernhard Scholz Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 8:10 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Locations Jerry, why not include the county name in the location as in your case. The more data included in the Master Locations makes it easier to combine. Why add data to a notes field the global locations, which have to be edited later manualy. Perhaps later on hundreds. I agree that we have a problem. At the moment we only have eighter the Master List Location or the Address Window. In my opinion that's that's the problem. At the moment we have to add for every exact event the global location address as a seperate "Master List Location". This would mean at the moment in my case for the same "city" over 10 Master List Locations. In my case I have one Master List Location and 10 Address Locations. To make it perhaps easier to understand look at it this way. An example, perhaps not the best ;-), but due to the size of the city and it's multinationl status. A family lives in eg. L.A., Cal., ,USA for over fifty years. They have eg. 5 children, two nationalities, 10 grandchildren, 20 grandchildren and XX greatgrandchildren. This means perhaps hundreds of Master List loccations. Instead we could have one Master location, L.A., and hundreds of Address Locations. Using the suggested we could reduce the size of the Family File. As the result depends on the changes on the side of Legacy and in the way the Users work it's difficult to say something about the result. Perhaps something to think about. Bernhard -----Original Message----- From: Jerry [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 5:52 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Locations I understand the historical part, but some of us prefer to use the NOTE field to explain when there are differences in jurisdictions or what a location was called. Afterall, as someone said recently, the latitude and longitude does not change and we like to use the mapping system and tie a particular location into every person referenced for that spot on the map. So, even though I generally always like to include the COUNTY -- in your example, I would not put the county in the location. I would leave the COUNTY place marker empty between commas, as follows: Woodstock, , Connecticut, USA and have the appropriate note attached to that location to explain when it was a part of Windham County and when it was a part of Suffolk County. That is just a personal preference to keep from having hundreds or quite literally even thousands of extra locations in the database (ex: Upper Canada, Canada West, British America, Massachusetts Bay Colony - you could go on and on and create even thousands of extra places, if you take that to the extreme). So, I'm not saying you are wrong in listing such locations separately, just my reason for doing otherwise. Jerry Boor / http://www.MerriamFamilyTree.org On 11/16/2011 07:39 PM, Geoff Rasmussen wrote: > Hey Tony, > > I wish people would disagree with me more often - we all can learn > from each other. > > However, understanding the location at the time of the event is > crucial to research success. Woodstock, Connecticut has always had the same latitude/longitude. Today it resides in Windham County. If you look for records in Woodstock, Windham County for an ancestor that lived in Woodstock in 1720, you won't find what you are looking for because at that time it resided in Suffolk County, Massachusetts. If I were to record the person's birth as 1720 in Woodstock, Windham County, Connecticut, it would be false - the place simply did not exist then. My recommendation then is to record the location as it existed at the time of the event AND in the event's notes, record the name of the place as it exists today to cross-reference each other. > > Good luck, > > Geoff > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Rolfe [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 5:10 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [LegacyUG] Locations > > Paula wants me to change the thread title, so here goes. > > Hi, Geoff > > I have to disagree with your statement that "it's the location at the > time of the event that is important not the location as it is [or isn't] now." > > Surely the whole point is that these two locations are the same location. > The names may have changed, the old location may now be in the middle of a motorway, under a reservoir or have fallen off a crumbling cliff into the ocean. However, where it was is where it is. > The latitude and longitude are still there. > > Researching people is also about researching locations. Where they > lived is important. Where they lived often determined how they lived. > Sometimes reaearching the locations highlights problems. I have a > grand uncle and his wife who moved to Canada. His granddaughter contacted me and told me that he told he that "he married his childhood sweetheart". > Fine, until you include location details. She was born and lived > about > 25 miles South of the wide part of the Thames Estuary. He was born and lived about the same distance North. There is no obvious way from one place to the other in a time when travel wan't as easy as it is today. > > My research shows that they didn't meet until they both moved to a > third location. So what is wrong? Something doesn't add up. Is the childhood sweetheart just a family story? Do I have the wrong wife? > The wrong grand uncle? Did they both travel to the coast and meet on > holiday? Without knowing the locations, I wouldn't know there was an issue. It's on my to-do list. > > Why do I prefer jpegs over PDF's? Partly because I don't like any of > the PDF readers and I can't afford (or be bothered) to buy a PDF editor. > Partly because I can use photoshop to make poor-quality jpeg images > more readable. Nothing really profound. Just a personal preference. > > Cheers > > Tony > > 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
