GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2000-01 > 0949083003


From: Rafal Prinke <>
Subject: Re: Ratings issues--and TAG & Pedigree
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 19:10:03 +0100


"Chris & Tom Tinney, Sr." <> wrote:

> Another concept not heretofore mentioned in this
> thread is the establishment of an Online Rate a Pedigree
> or Link Connection. Members of GEN-MEDIEVAL
> would then be given the opportunity, and feel free,
> to vote: register a seasoned opinion. This would allow
> an on-going review of record sources from the most
> learned in the field of Medieval Genealogy and provide
> a resource site for the justification of accepting a particular
> link connection: the technical mechanics for a consensus.

Actually, I mentioned something like that in a similar discussion
a year or two ago. As a result, I have constructed a mechanism
for on-line Web database which is also a discussion list. The test
of my ideas is implemented (with ancestors of my children as sample
data) at:

http://hum.amu.edu.pl/~rafalp/test-j.htm

When you browse to any record - for example to go directly to Bela III
of Hungary, duscussed here recently, you may use this URL:

http://main.amu.edu.pl/bin-rafalp/osoby2.pl?00219318

a family group is displayed with five buttons at the top, one of which
is "Commentaria" (I used Latin on these). When you click on that button,
a smaller window is displayed containing any previous comments about that
person or family (nothing there at present - but feel free to type
anything in it and then click "Submit Comments"; when you open the window
again, those comments will be there). When comments are submitted, they
are linked to a particular individual record in the database, and
are also e-mailed to all subscribers. The messages are so constructed
that one cannot reply to them but instead contain the URL of the individual
in the database so that clicking on it takes one to the same family
group and one can reply/comment on-line in the same way. My idea was
that in this way various opinions, primary source quotations, arguments etc.
may be accumulated BEFORE the data or links in the database itself are
modified/corrected by the administrator.

I think this model reflects what we were saying about reaching consensus
by degrees. The administrator(s) of a database like that could review
the comments/arguments (which are physically stored in a separate file)
from time to time and if they decide there is sufficient consensus
that the link/filiation or other information should be modified, they
can do that. Otherwise, they can leave the comments as insufficient
(so the discussion remains "open") or edit them and move to "sources".

If ever implemented "for real", such database should also restrict
"write access" to a limited group of persons who would at least
cite sources of their information and/or arguments. This can be easily
done with passwords but accepting or rejecting people, as well
as recruiting real experts, is a serious problem (as usual with
human resources).

As I have not mentioned it since my first announcement (which passed
unnoticed), any comments are appreciated. Also, if anyone is interested,
I may add him/her/it to the subscribers of the discussion list so
that they can see how it works in practice.

A reliable database would have to be built from scratch (as already
pointed out by Stewart Baldwin) because correcting an existing
giant database is an impossible task. The best way to build it
would be perhaps to input managable fragments and then post them
on GEN-MEDIEVAL for general discussion before including in
the on-line version. This would allow to change the questionable
links to "possible" or something, and/or include multiple
possibilities. I still think that ES should be the frame of
reference, so that only the information that differs from
it is footnoted/explained/sourced. Otherwise, if every link
would require top quality argumentation and references to
primary sources, it would be totally impossible to construct.


In the context of the E-Journal proposed by Chico, a database like
that can serve this purpose, too. In fact, it transcends the metaphor
of a paper journal in favour of a new format which was not possible
in the age of print.

Best regards,

Rafal

This thread: