TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-01 > 1041966681


From:
Subject: Re: [TMG] Sort dates, reply to Bob (medium)
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 14:11:21 -0500
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20030106183747.00a4be00@pop.sprynet.com><5.1.0.14.2.20030105184600.059f8c30@mail.whollygenes.com><5.1.0.14.0.20030105083529.009edec0@pop.sprynet.com><5.1.0.14.2.20030104230553.04c7e490@mail.whollygenes.com><5.1.0.14.0.20030104174533.00a38a20@pop.sprynet.com><5.2.0.9.2.20030104104922.0306dec0@pop3.norton.antivirus><5.1.0.14.0.20030104084738.00a27840@pop.sprynet.com><88.21f14548.2b47be9f@aol.com><5.1.1.6.0.20030107130034.0284a080@mail.fscv.net>
In-Reply-To: <00dc01c2b67d$0db30b00$2f3d6051@caroline>


>>Walt Flory wrote:
>>I have struggled with whether (when looking at census data) to say
>>something happened after the year of the census, or to say it
>>happened after the year before the census.
At 01:45 PM 7/01/2003, Caroline Gurney wrote:
>Why not say it happened after the actual date of the census? I have many
>people in my dataset with death dates of "after 3 April 1881", the date of
>the British 1881 Census.


I was afraid someone might ask that. <g>

It was late, I was tired, and I didn't look the official date of the census
up like I should have.

Walt



This thread: