Bob J. wrote:
<snip>
> This is undoubtedly the most indefensible numbering system for anything
> that I can recall. The whole point of assigning a number to anything
> is to provide an absolutely unambiguous identifier that can be used by
> everyone to ensure that they are referring to exactly the same thing.
Well, Bob that's your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it.
However, Dollarhide's binary system seems pretty clever to me and
could be a useful tool for numbering people, in order to enhance one's
ability to navigate ones own database. There are other perfectly
legitimate reasons to number people in a database than to enhance
sharing with others
<snip>
> But the Dollarhide "system" requires everyone using it to assign a
> DIFFERENT number to the very SAME individual. The accurate sharing of
> data is totally impossible using this numbering "system", and anyone
> receiving a copy of your file would have to start all over assigning
> the numbers-from-hell to every individual. Since the number will be
> essentially random from one file to the next, I see no advantage to be
> gained from having to manually assign this number rather than just using
> the default random numbers assigned by Legacy.
Dollarhides numbering system has much to recommend it above and
beyond the "random numbers" assigned by Legacy. Because they are
ordered and fit a pattern, certain things about the relationship of the
person to the root person, (#1) can be exactly determined. If one is
interested in exploring relationships of people within a file, they
can be very useful. Every genealogical numbering system requires
a different number for the same person. So??? I don't know of
a single genealogical numbering system designed to facilitate
sharing of information. It is true the Mormons assign Ancestral
File numbers to people. But this is not what I'd call a numbering
"system" such as the ahentafel numbering system or the Henry
numbering system. The purpose of all these systems is to give
each person a number which says something about their relationship
to a "root person" in an electronic database or even a database
maintained by old fashioned methods such as index cards, for which
many of these systems were invented.
Oh, BTW, I think it's illegal to use SSN for any purpose other than
tracking employment and determining social security benefits, and
technically no one except the feds and employers are supposed to
use it. I think even the IRS use of SSN required a special loophole
be written in the original Social Security law.
jr
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
