GENBOX-L ArchivesArchiver > GENBOX > 2004-02 > 1075825647
From: "Paul J. Harris" <>
Subject: RE: [GENBOX] Citation Wish
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:27:29 -0500
"This would suggest that we should broaden the purpose of the extra field
beyond "justification" or "relevant fact", so that personal thoughts as to
the credibility of the source as well as its relevancy to the assertion
might be stored there."
Bill, you have given us an unprecedented capability to talk to our audience
through General Notes, and to talk to ourselves through Research Notes. More
than one person has commented on the attractiveness of this feature.
You have provided it for us at the Assertion End of the chain at the
Identifiers, Parents, Family, Event, and Notes Tabs on the Individual View.
Quite extensive! You have provided it for us at the Source end of the chain
on the Notes Tab of the Source View. But you are right, it does not exist
along the crucial link of the chain, the Citation. There's no place to talk
to yourself when you are holding an Assertion in one hand and a Source in
Some would argue that Lead Text or Annotation could be used and excluded,
but that defeats their purpose. I did not see the need for an ADDITIONAL
field at the beginning of this discussion, but given the above and your
comments, it begins to make a lot of sense.
"I think in many cases, the analysis of the credibility of a source
rightfully belongs in the annotation, so that the discussion will be
included on reports for the next researcher. But if you are collecting
sources in support of an assertion and haven't yet decided which ones are
best, some brief note to yourself as to why you might think a source is less
credible could be very useful. Maybe it could serve as a "shorthand" for a
longer passage stored in the annotation."
Or vice versa! IOW, my notes to myself about how I arrived at what I print
in the Annotation Field my be far more extensive and detailed than my