Jump to content


Photo

TMG to RM question: citation memo goes to citation comments

tmg citation memo citation research note

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 ketchell

ketchell

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 45 posts

Posted 15 March 2017 - 04:00 PM

Looking for advice from RM experts about census citation notes. I've read the forum and many RM experts recommend placing the census enumeration abstract in both the event note and the citation detail research note. Initially this seemed like a lot of copy/pasting, but seeing the value of this approach as I begin changing my census note to more story-like note vs just the abstract. Having the actual abstract in the research note will be very useful in the future.

 

From current testing it appears RM imports TMG's citation memo note into the RM citation detail text comments rather than the citation detail text research note. I could manually cut/paste each citation one at a time from comment box to research box. But looking for something across the board as I clean up my TMG source/citation data in anticipation of the final transfer.

 

Is there any way to choose where the TMG citation memo data is imported in RM?

 

Assuming  not, is there any note field in TMG that is imported into RM's research notes? If so I could make a change in TMG before importing into RM.

 

If there is nothing I can do on the TMG side, is there an SQL query to move citation comments to citation research notes within RM?

 

Thanks for your advice.



#2 Jim Byram

Jim Byram

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 68 posts

Posted 15 March 2017 - 06:25 PM

TMG has one citation memo field and it's up to the user how it is used. Some people use the field for comments and others use it for actual text and some do both using split memos.

 

RM has four citation memo fields and Master text / Source Comments was the most neutral choice. So that's how it's done.



#3 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6251 posts

Posted 15 March 2017 - 08:33 PM

A SQLite script can readily move content from one of those fields to the other.

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#4 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3568 posts

Posted 15 March 2017 - 10:17 PM

Of the four fields that Jim mentions, two can be printed as a part of footnotes/endnotes and two cannot.

 

In some ways the names of the four fields are meaningful and are suggestive of how you might be expected to use them. With respect to what RM calls the Master Source, there is Master Text which is divided into two memo fields called Source Text and Source Comments. Neither of these two fields can be printed as a part of footnotes/endnotes. Some users would probably be inclined to call the "Master Source" simply the "Source".

 

With respect to the rest of the sourcing data, there is Detail Text which is divided into two memo fields that you might think would be called the Detail Text and the Detail Comments. However, these two fields are actually called Research Notes and Comments. These are the names of the fields from the Edit Source screen, and the same fields have other names in other places in the user interface, something that badly needs to be cleaned up. Either or both of these two fields can be printed as a part of footnotes/endnotes. Some users would probably be inclined to call the rest of the sourcing data simply the "Citation".

 

For a book, the Master Source typically contains the title and author of the book, along with the associated publishing information. The Master Source is expected to be reused for many, many citations. The rest of the sourcing data would contain the page number. For other genealogical records - birth certificates, death certificates, marriage certificates, obituaries, census, and the like - which part of the sourcing data is contained in the Master Source and which part is contained in the "Citation" data is often disputed between source splitters and source lumpers.

 

I actually don't find the names of the four memo fields to be very meaningful or useful. I simply remember that there are four of them, that two of them are associated with the Master Source and two of them are associated with the "Citation", and that only the two that are associated with the "Citation" can be printed out as a part of endnotes/footnotes.

 

A current weakness in RM's sourcing model is that if, for example, you create a citation and memorize and paste it 29 times, you will then have 30 different instances of the citation. If you then find a typographical error in one of the memo fields associated with that citation, you have to correct the error 30 different times. For any data that's in the Master Source, any error only has to be corrected 1 time and the error automatically becomes corrected in all 30 citations. For that reason, I have become an extreme source splitter, and I enter 100% of my sourcing data into RM's Master Source. I don't presently print any memos along with footnotes/endnotes. But if I did, I would have to write a (very simple) SQLite script that would copy every Source Text field into every associated Research Notes field. If I found an error in a Source Text, I would correct the error in the Source Text fields and rerun my script.

 

If you enter text into either of the memo fields associated with your "Citations", there is an option to print them or not as a part of printing reports. But if you haven't entered any such text, then enabling the option when printing a report obviously doesn't do anything.

 

Jerry



#5 ketchell

ketchell

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 45 posts

Posted 15 March 2017 - 10:45 PM

Just the experts I needed to hear from.

 

Jim - good to know what was done so I don't beat my head against a wall. Thanks.

 

Tom - great to know I can use an SQL to move my TMG Citation Memos imported as RM Citations Comments into the "box" above Research notes. I have used the TMG CM's consistently so this will work for me.

 

Jerry - thanks for the detailed description re: source notes vs citation notes. I read that but didn't absorb it before. I'm a lumper vs. splitter. I don't expect to do many reports except for research use in RM. GedSite will be go to.

 

Will keep working on best way to "store" the census abstract note in RM that will append it to the citation in Gedsite. It is easier for me to clean up sources/citations in TMG and then import to RM as sources are searchable and the citation reports are already known, and then I'll move things around using SQL.



#6 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3568 posts

Posted 16 March 2017 - 09:20 AM

I don't expect to do many reports except for research use in RM. GedSite will be go to.

 

Will keep working on best way to "store" the census abstract note in RM that will append it to the citation in Gedsite. 

 

I use the source/citation memo fields in RM. But since I don't really print the source/citation memo fields in RM reports, I also don't include them in GedSite. Which is to say that my source/citation memo fields in RM are not really formatted appropriately to be included in footnotes/endnotes in RM. They are just there for me to document my research for myself.

 

It has occurred to me that it might be useful to include RM's source/citation memo fields in GedSite. If I were going to do so, I would research the situation by creating a new, empty RM database, adding one person to the database, and adding one source and associated citation to the database. In the one source and citation, I would populate the four different source/citation memo fields with dummy memos that were distinctly different. Then I would export a GEDCOM and examine the GEDCOM to be sure I understood where RM placed each of the four memos in the GEDCOM. Finally, I would import the GEDCOM into GedSite and make a site to see how each of RM's four kinds of sourcing memos show up in GedSite.

 

In my limited work with GedSite so far, it seems to me that GedSite's source/citation model is somewhat different than RM's, and I therefore have to think about things a little differently in GedSite. Which is to say, that GedSite has citation sentences and separate from that it has source sentences. On the other hand, RM combines "source data" and "citation data" into a single footnote/endnote sentence. It's not that one approach is better than the other. They are just different. Because my existing RM source/citation memo fields are not really formatted appropriately for including with RM's footnote/endnote sentences, they are also not formatted appropriately for including with GedSite's citation or source sentences, Therefore, I have had to change the citation sentence template and the source sentence template in GedSite to eliminate the sourcing memos from the sentences.

 

Jerry