The book, "Getting It Right" was mentioned in another list that I belong to. The author Mary H. Slawson has attempted to standardize the way we enter data, as it is hard to transfer data (miscommunication) if there is not a standardized way. One review that I read, called it a style manual. Anyway, there is some very good things about the book, as it makes you use the correct titles, dates, etc. The Immigration problem is just one of a few sentence problems in the book. She is trying to codify genealogy tags, such as the probate tag. Under the probate tag she has Appeals, Judgments, Estates, Executors, Trusts, Witnesses, etc. Her request that you put the 'sub-tag' into the description box. That is where I got into trouble, as I had the sentence sounding the way I wanted it, but when I tried to put the book into practice on Event tags, I ran into the problem and had to put the facts into the notes box.
There is some things that are excellent in this book. I never understood Quaker dating until I read this book, and I think that we as family historians, should do our work so it is understandable by laymen and correctly so that academic scholars respect our work. I feel that she is making attempt at this. She states that this book is "The Definitive guide to Recording Family History Accurately" on the title page. The book is copyrighted in 2002. As to Legacy, there is an acknowledgement of Dave Berdan and Ken McGinnis in the front of the book and Legacy is used to demonstrate data entry techniques. I would buy the book again as I think this is something that is needed in genealogy. I just wished that she would have demonstrated how she would have rewrote the Event tag sentences. If you are interested, I bought it at Amazon.com. Elizabeth ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda Bischoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 2:01 PM Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] 'Getting It Right' > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "familygen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, 19 April, 2004 12:30 PM > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] 'Getting It Right' > > Elizabeth > > Could you put in the description area "from Liverpool England aboard the > ship Rochester"? > > Or could you put in the description area "from England" and then in the > notes area enter something like: He arrived on the ship Rochester, having > boarded in Liverpool. --Or something similar. > > It seems to me that "arrival in USA" is redundant, when you have the > Location area to indicate where he came into US. But the event > "immigration" by its very nature, should indicate where he came from, if you > know. Conversely, if you were using the event emmigration, you would > probably indicate where the person was going, if you knew. > > Your book "Getting it Right" sounds interesting. Is it for Legacy? or is it > generalized for any program? > > Linda B. > : > > > > I guess that I am not making myself clear. Elizabeth, I basically agree > > with your statements. Cathy, yes, I am talking about Event Sentences. > > > > Cathy, there is a book that I just received called "Getting It Right" by > > Mary Slawson. It is a book on standardization of facts including wording > on > > Event tag description boxes. I had alot of my information in the > > description area, which I moved to the notes area. When I put in the > > standardize wording, such as the event tag "Immigration" and the sub > title > > in the description box is "Arrival in the United States. The sentence > then > > looks like this: He immigrated Arrival in the United States on 8 Sep 1845 > to > > New York City, New York, USA. The notes area is added - George came on > the > > ship 'Rochester' from Liverpool, England (Nara M237, Roll 50). > > > > Obviously, this sentence does not read well at all. Ladies this is what I > > am talking about. Any ideas on how to change the default sentence to read > > well, while keeping the standardized wording and not having to change the > > wording everytime. > > > > BTW, yes, research papers are done for a grade, but not always. Your > family > > history should have the same or better scholarship. That is the reason why > > we source, source, source! Yes, I want my Aunt Mamie to understand her > > family history, and probably she will not check sources, but if we want to > > be accepted by the Academic community as a real subject, then we need to > > follow the "rules" of correctness. Yes, everyone will have some variation > in > > style, but there is a style manual for most subjects that you have to > > follow. That is what I thought this book was about when I bought it. > > > > Any ideas on how to achieve this is much appreciated. > > > > Thanks, > > Elizabeth > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Cathy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 10:24 PM > > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] 'Getting It Right' > > > > > > > Hi Elizabeth, > > > > > > I haven't been reading this thread as I haven't seen the book you are > > > referring to so have no idea why you are trying to follow its advice. > > > > > > But are you talking about Event Sentences? > > > > > > Of course you want these to read correctly with grammatically correct > > > sentence structure. > > > > > > If you are talking of Event Sentences, have you seen that you can Edit > the > > > Event Sentences? So long as you use the various fields in a standard > way, > > > you don't have to write an Override sentence each time. I haven't had > any > > > problem getting correct sentences for the events I use. Perhaps the > book's > > > recommendations require more fields in order to generate the advised > > sentence. > > > > > > Of course you may be speaking of other automatically generated sentences > > to > > > do with birth and death dates etc. If you are speaking of marriage > > > sentences. These can be handled in most cases - however you have to make > > > sure you choose "unmarried" in the Marriage Status to pick up your > > > alternative wording. I don't think the other status options do though > > > logically all except Married would. > > > > > > There is still a problem with dealing with unknown father/mother or one > > > that for one reason or another you wish to suppress. Late last year > there > > > was discussion about using the Private Individual tag to provide an > > > invisible option - however so far it hasn't eventuated and I haven't > seen > > > an update from Dave or Ken on the status of the ideas Dave was floating > > then. > > > > > > How your data transfers via gedcom is a completely different issue. I > can > > > see no value in restricting myself to an old standard. I'd rather use > the > > > features in Legacy to the full. Transferring information via Gedcom is > not > > > an issue for me. Inputting data and getting it out in good reports is. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Cathy > > > > > > At 10:47 19/04/2004, you wrote: > > > > > > >Now I really understand what is going on! The question is - gedcoms - > > are > > > >they going to be used long-term? I think not. So how would that affect > > data > > > >entry? I am all for standardization, but only for gedcom value? There > > are > > > >already genealogy programs on the market that you do not have to do > > > >gedcoms - in that case I would think that having correct sentences > would > > be > > > >more a benefit than a liability. Is the whole reason for this book for > > > >transferring gedcoms? I am more concerned with the completeness of my > > > >information, including the transfer of information. Just have a title > in > > a > > > >description field in my reports do not cut it, correctly written > > sentences > > > >are another must have. What I have found out is that I must customize > > about > > > >2/3's of my sentences. That is unacceptable to me - I might as will do > my > > > >own writing as in a research paper in grad. school. It would take me > > less > > > >time, and I would not need a genealogy program, as one of the big > > benefits > > > >would be missing. > > > > > > > >I am sorry that this subject is not entirely on Legacy. I am just havi > ng > > > >problems making the book and program work together. If I now had a > > request > > > >on Legacy, that at some future point if the book 'Getting It Right is > > really > > > >put into practice, that somehow that this could work with the given > > sentence > > > >structure. This could save us alot of time. By the way, if someone > > figures > > > >out a better way to use this book, I would like to know! > > > > > > > >Thanks, > > > >Elizabeth > > > > > > Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: > > > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > > > > > > To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/ > > > > > > To unsubscribe please visit: > > > http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > > > > > > > Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: > > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > > > > To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/ > > > > To unsubscribe please visit: > > http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > > To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/ > > To unsubscribe please visit: > http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp > Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/ To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp
