TMG-L ArchivesArchiver > TMG > 2010-11 > 1289172739
From: Rick Van Dusen <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Use of Married name tags
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 15:32:19 -0800
Okay, I see that difference now. So TMG "create NAME-MARR tag=Y" would
create that NAME-MARR tag for b. Johnston and m. Johnston (e.g. Agnes),
but TMG-U would not. (And re-reading Teresa's paragraph, I see that's
what she was saying.)
However, that still doesn't address my issue here. It would explain why,
if I'd created the NAME-MARR tags with TMG-U, I would NOT see Agnes in
my filtered results. It still does not explain why I see so many besides
Agnes in my results.
And looking at my results again, if I check "Primary", the results drop
from 216 to 126, but include women b. Johnston who have no NAME-VAR tag
at all, nor in fact were married. I ran this again with
NAME-VAR:#citations >=1 instead of >0, but got same results.
Adding Marr group <=1 brought it down to 93. This new listing still
includes b. Johnston women with no NAME-VAR tag! Also continues to
include several woman not b. Johnston but m. Johnston. It appears that
the NAME-VAR tag is not being read, but instead I'm getting results as
if I'd asked for "name group".
John Cardinal wrote:
> Rick Van Dusen wrote:
>> 2. TMG-U would not duplicate existing NAME-MARR tags, but
>> would create all the missing ones. Right?
> TMGU will not create a Name-Marr tag if the person already has an existing
> Name Tag with the surname of the spouse. So, if a woman named Johnston
> marries a man named Johnston, TMGU doesn't add a Name-Marr tag.
> The primary purpose of the TMGU "Add Married Names" feature is to add names
> that make it easy to find women by their married names in the picklist.
> Having two names that will sort to the same place in the picklist isn't
> useful. A Name-Marr tag with the same surname as another name tag may be
> useful for other purposes, but TMGU doesn't address that use.
|Re: [TMG] Use of Married name tags by Rick Van Dusen <>|