TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2010-02 > 1266885970


From: Rick Van Dusen <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Census Tags - Repetitiveness
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:46:10 -0800
References: <201022219115.319876@Terry>
In-Reply-To: <201022219115.319876@Terry>


Where I'm not sure about the future of my entries concerns the
"tidbits". What you've done here, Terry, is to differentiate between
"otherwise notable events", e.g. occupation, (stuff that fits in
standard tags) and the "tidbits" that only appear in the Census but
might add a little color--or just to make the entry complete.

(I'm also not sure how I'll tag Census--maybe use custom tags for each
Census?, or how I'll configure the source reference when I go back
through these tags. For instance, I might decide [learn from someone] to
put all the tidbits into a segmented memo field. Still a lot of
questions, and this is a lower priority for my conversion process.)

But it seems very reasonable to me to enter the "standard" events as
separate tags. "Tells a better story."



Terry Reigel wrote:
> Rick Van Dusen wrote:
>
>> I don't know if I will continue this as I clean up my
>> newly-imported data, but in FTM, I always entered the
>> Census with just the location "in the tag", but with all
>> the other data (e.g. occupation) in other "tags".
>
> I think it's a better idea to put information that's broader then the census in appropriate tags, as you describe. So I put all the occupation information, from various census years and elsewhere, in a single tag or group of occupation tags. I normally sort them all together, generally after the census. Likewise immigration data from the census joins other information, if any, about immigration in an immigration tag. Name, age, and relationship information goes in name, birth, marriage, and relationship tags. All these cite the census as a source.
>
> This leaves then some information that seems to me like a "snapshot" of the family's life, which I put in the census tag. I include the date and where they were, which family members were living in the household, and "tidbits" that vary by census years, like the value of assets, ownership of their home or a radio, whether there were boarders or servants, and proximity to nearby relatives. To me, putting that all in the census tag creates an obvious explanation about why that snapshot exists, and doesn't require me to speculate about what was happening in between those years if I don't have any information about those periods.
>
> Terry Reigel
>
> -------------------------------
> For searching the list archives and other list information, please go to http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html.
> To contact the TMG List Administrator, send a message to .
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>

This thread: