TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2010-08 > 1282675173


From: Rick Van Dusen <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Regarding married names
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:39:33 -0700
References: <005f01cb43b2$8b534140$a1f9c3c0$@acm.org><rc1876lietd1i0a3bh5logvqe7dl8bg57s@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <rc1876lietd1i0a3bh5logvqe7dl8bg57s@4ax.com>


TMG's ability to handle either, or a combination, of these approaches is
a major strong point. Unlike some other gen apps, TMG can accommodate as
many name variants (for example) as the user wishes.

I agree with John to some extent that a name variant which is obviously
the invention of some scribe (e.g. 1850 Census for Albany Co., NY, where
all Van Deusen variants were entered as Van Dusen) can be entered in a
citation, rather than a separate name tag.

Because nearly all of my data entry to-date was done before I switched
to TMG, I chose neither of the methods (citation text or separate tag).
Having only one name field available, I entered the first name variation
I found, changing it only when compelling evidence gave me another
version. Hardly the ideal.




Richard Damon wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:34:01 -0700, <> wrote:
>
>> John Cardinal wrote-
>> .... and I recognized that most TMG users don't
>> require citations on married name tags and so they could delete all the
>> existing married name tags and then add them back in if they wanted to
>> change them.
>>
>> I took notice of this comment because of a recent change in my data entry
>> standards.
>> I am now entering names into the database exactly as they appear in the
>> source and then citing the source in that name variation.
>> I assumed that this was the intent of the database design. Is this correct?
>>
>
> There are two basic models for data entry (each sort of an extreme,
> most likely people will use a mixture of them)
>
> The first, is a conclusion model, where the user enters as the tags,
> their final conclusions about what happened. For example, names would
> be the best estimate of what names that person actually used, and not
> variations caused by mistakes, etc. Dates are recorded as the authors
> best determination of when something actually happened, (so events
> described in relations to other events, the author calculates when
> they actually occurred). Details about what the source actually said
> and why the author came to their conclusions are relegated to memos
> (tag/source/or citation). I believe this is what TMG was primarily
> designed to be used as (as note that the Date field. to be useful for
> computing ages and such, needs to be "regular" and then doesn't
> remember the exact format the date was entered).
>
> The second model is evidential, where the data recorded in a tag, is
> entered as close to as possible to what the record said, with minimal
> interpretation by the author. Here dates are often irregular to record
> what the source said, and extra name tags might be entered to
> represent the spelling of the original source. TMG supports this model
> fairly well too.
>
:
:
:
>
> Richard Damon
> http://genealogy.damon-family.org

This thread: