TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2008-05 > 1209859144

From: "Teresa Elliott" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Citation reference code proposal
Date: Sat, 3 May 2008 18:59:42 -0500
References: <><>
In-Reply-To: <>

Michael, I have to admit, I don't think it matters if I use the "correct"
term or not. Frankly, you can call them George if you want, I don't care. I
am pretty sure we both understand what it is that I want, and because even I
am bored with the exchange, and am sure others are, I am not going to
belabor the points any longer.

I want to click on open a tag, add a citation to the list on the right hand
side, and put a 2 in the Date and a 2 in the place. When I print a report, I
want a footnote (superscripted number) to print on my sentence above the
date, that will list all the sources with a surety above 0 in the date field
of the citation entry screen in the footnotes section of my report.

Then I want to have a footnote (superscripted number) to print on my
sentence above the place, that will list all the sources with a surety above
a 0 in the place field of the citation entry screen in the footnotes section
of my report.

If citation 1 has a 2 for the date, and a 2 for the place, then a 1 will be
superscripted over both and my list of sources will have a 1, with the
citation listed. If the CD is different, then the date would have a 1
superscripted over it, and the place would have a two. I do not know how to
be more simple in my explanation.

If the proposal, or any other makes it to the drawing board, and makes in it
a version of TMG X, I will use it if it allows me to do the above, if it
doesn't then I will be happy for you because it will do whatever it is that
you are trying to do that I am simply NOT getting.

It doesn't sound like from what I have read that your proposal really does
anything but move George's from one place (at the end of the sentence) to
another (though I haven't figured out where) and I just don't see the point.
You say you want to move it to the interior of the sentence, I just want to
move it to two separate places.
Good luck though, I won't fight the issue. It may actually be what I want
when it's implemented. <G> But for now, I am signing off on this discussion.
Note, I am not angry at anyone. I have enjoyed the exchange, but I think the
proposal would have more chance of getting implemented if it wasn't bogged
down by discussion about things the feature doesn't do, than by discussion
of things it will do.

In the meantime, I will keep using the CD field to tell me and my readers
what part of the date the source comes from. I find it helpful.

Have fun. Good luck. I am off to do something now work for a little while.

Teresa Ghee Elliott
My genealogy blog

-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:] On Behalf
Of Michael J. Hannah
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: [TMG] Citation reference code proposal

But Teresa, I believe that using the appropriate precise term is central
to being sure we can understand each other. I believe you are using
both the terms "source" and "citation" in a way that (I think) are not
what you intend to be trying to say. Further, the term intended to be
referenced by your use of the pronoun "it" is very unclear.

Let me explain my confusion, and possibly Frankie's, with your
statements. First, contrary to your comment, a user does not add a
"source" to the list of citations for a tag, they add a "citation" to
the list. "Sources" are only added to the Master Source List. As
Elizabeth Shown Mills states: "The term _citation_ is obviously not
synonymous with the term _source_ , and the two should not be used
interchangeably." Next, the proposal says nothing about the amount of
places either a "source" or a "citation" would print, although these are
the only two terms you used. "Sources" only print in the Bibliography,
and then only if requested and cited, and no change is proposed to that.
A Reference Note (which as Bill observes is often identical to a
"citation" in TMG) only prints once either as a footnote or endnote as
specified by the Report Definition, and no change is proposed to that.
The proposal only suggests that the single "Reference Note Number"
associated with a citation be able to be specified to print interior to
the output of a tag rather than only at the end-of-tag output. That is
the essence of the enhancement proposed.

You state: "it should be able to print as many times as I tell the
report definition for it to print". But what is "it"? I "think" you
mean the Reference Note Number, although you never used that term.
However, if you do, that would violate the guidelines of Mills and
Chicago Style as to the standard definition of a Reference Note Number,
which is why we can probably agree to disagree. <smile/sigh>


This thread: