TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-01 > 1042666461


From: "James P. Colgate" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] General comment on Roles (was Getting rid of Roles)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:34:21 -0500
References: <MCEMJEDENIHEFICCLPEEAEONDDAA.ebay1@gordonbanks.com>


Yes, any witness does need to be in your database to be added as a witness.
For better or worse, that's the way it is. It may seem counter-intuitive to
put "peripheral" people in your dataset, but it's a choice I made to do --
and you may very well feel differently, which is fine.

I even sometimes add people to my dataset who are completely unrelated to
anyone (i.e. a servant in a census household, a witness to a will, etc.) It
all depends on how I set up the sentence structure for that tag. I don't
mind the extra people in my dataset, as the trade-off for adding them is
being able to utilize the full potential and power of a true database. Just
my two cents.

James Colgate


----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Banks" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 3:59 PM
Subject: RE: [TMG] General comment on Roles (was Getting rid of Roles)


> I guess I am a bit confused about the witnesses and the roles. I don't
want
> people in my database who are not related to me by blood or marriage.
There
> are enough people in it as it is. If I want to say who married someone, I
> put it in the memo. If I used witness or role for these peripheral
people,
> it seems they would have to go into the database as a person. Isn't that
> so? Now if a relative was a witness, then that is different.
>
>
>
> ==== TMG Mailing List ====
> To un-subscribe from TMG-L (mail mode), send a message to
<> with just the word "unsubscribe" (no quotes)in
the text and turn off your signature.

This thread: