Jump to content


Photo

Place Format


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 usma79

usma79

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 07 May 2004 - 08:22 PM

I would like to see boxes to enter place names in a standarized format. For example have a box for state, county, city, township and so forth that can be easily filled in (and then sorted by any of them). Then the output can be displayed in a consistent manner.

Dean

#2 Guest_craigg43_*

Guest_craigg43_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 May 2004 - 07:45 AM

That would be great. A box for street address, and one for cemetery, hospital, school name would be nice also.

#3 usma79

usma79

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 08 May 2004 - 09:29 AM

I agree with those additions too. That is what I was getting to, some nice consistent format. We might as well as start with the US and then expand that to other countries as we get to them.

#4 jjmick

jjmick

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 08 May 2004 - 09:33 AM

I concur wholeheartedly. This would be a very welcome addition which would greatly standardize data input and reduce the number of "duplicate" entries caused by different data input formats.

#5 diamondk

diamondk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 08 May 2004 - 11:15 AM

We do not wish to see this one implemented unless it is an option. First, it would require a large number of boxes (facility name, street address, city or town, township, parish, county, state, country, and maybe others) for each event such as birth, death, burial. Second, there is the issue of backward compatibility, i.e. we do not want to go through 1000+ place entries currently in our database and reformat them to comply with this new scenario. Third, would this comply with the current GEDCOM standard? One could envision the problems with importing and exporting GEDCOMs to other databases and programs.

We have our own standard format for places and prefer the flexibility of the current open format for managing our own database as we see fit.


#6 Guest_craig g_*

Guest_craig g_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 May 2004 - 07:34 AM

This could be implemnted like the source wizard with it being an optional way to enter place data and then combine the various fields into one place field.

#7 diamondk

diamondk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 09 May 2004 - 11:24 AM

It would be fine as an option. We and we're sure that many others that have large quantities of people to input would hate to loose the convenience of inputting places using the current method.

#8 Alfred

Alfred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5734 posts

Posted 09 May 2004 - 11:47 AM

At least, with a wizard, similar to the source wizard, you would have the option of entering each individual piece in the wizard and letting it put them back together for you, or entering the place field as we do now.

You would end up with the same thing in the place field that we now have: entity, city or township, county, state, (Country). I presume that a wizard would add the double commas if we left out an item. I sometimes forget to do that, but I doubt that I would use a place wizard anyway, I think that I can type a comma and a space more quickly than I can type a Tab or carriage return.
Alfred

#9 BarryEvans

BarryEvans

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Posted 09 May 2004 - 05:39 PM

The current system is fine because it does allow for great flexibility; my current address in Oz has just 3 lines, but my parents in the UK has 7! And RM handles it well when doing print outs etc. BUT, as we enter the info-sharing (overload?) age, it makes it very difficult to share *standardised* info. Didn't I read somewhere that the next GEDCOM will split the address field?
My own personal bug-bare is when I try to upload my GEDCOM to tribal pages, Genesconnected, Gencircles etc. Even though in my database it is essential that I put in house name/street number for someones residence, I don't want this to appear in online versions (for privavcy reasons and because it is is unecessary). Hence I have to manually export a temp GEDCOM, re-import it and strip the superflous address details, before re-exporting. Very tedious.
My 02 cents worth.
Barry


#10 jjmick

jjmick

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 10 May 2004 - 09:52 AM

I would agree with having this detailed entry system as an option. I, for one, would use it. The premise to genealogical research is, and always has been, standardized detail. The more detail, and a standardized means to input it, the better.

Also, freeform is great for notes but that is as far as it goes. Each researcher has their own idea of what is important to them but remember, genealogy/family history, or whatever else you want to call it, needs to be shared to be useful. The ability to enter as much, or as little, info as desired should be left to the researcher but I feel that others that use the data should also be able to use/input/modify as much or little as they desire also. A standard means of input is the only way to allow this interchange to happen, again IMHO.

RM is a fantastic, easy to use program but it is still in its infancy and is being modified and added to every day. Only Bruce knows what it will look like in the future.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

#11 Guest_Wylma_*

Guest_Wylma_*
  • Guests

Posted 20 May 2004 - 04:02 AM

I'm headed to Vinton County, Ohio to do some research. I use the place list to review all connections to Vinton County so that I won't overlook anyone from that area. Currently, the place will show me only activity that is specifically entered as Venton County, Ohio. It does not list Log Pile Cemetery, Vinton County, Ohio. I wish for a way to query for everything in the county including entries that are more specific than jut the county and state names.

#12 Alfred

Alfred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5734 posts

Posted 20 May 2004 - 09:12 AM

Do a Report > List > Place List to a file.

This list is sorted by country, state, county, entity ... At least it is if you entered your places as: Entity, City, County, State, Country.

Without country they will be sorted by state first.

then, about 2.3 of the way through it you will find ALL of the ohio listings together, maybe some OH listings too, each will be sorted by county then city, then church or cemetery or whatever.

You can delete the entries before and after Ohio, and print out all of the Ohio entries, or delete more and only print out the listing for one county in Ohio or even one city in Ohio.

======
There is also the Report > List > individual list > Selected people
When selecting people, Select people > "Select beople by data fields" and enter something like:
--- Any Place -- Contains -- Vinton county, Ohio
OR -- any place -- Contains -- Vinton Co., Ohio
OR -- any place -- Contains -- Vinton, Ohio
OR -- any place -- Contains -- Vinton County, Oh ...

--- and any other combinations you may have used. ---

Alfred

#13 Guest_Bill_*

Guest_Bill_*
  • Guests

Posted 21 May 2004 - 12:02 AM

There is also the Report > List > individual list > Selected people
When selecting people, Select people > "Select beople by data fields" and enter something like:
--- Any Place -- Contains -- Vinton county, Ohio
OR -- any place -- Contains -- Vinton Co., Ohio
OR -- any place -- Contains -- Vinton, Ohio
OR -- any place -- Contains -- Vinton County, Oh ...

--- and any other combinations you may have used. ---




Or you could just say Any Place--Contains--Vinton



Bill Peacock

#14 Alfred

Alfred

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5734 posts

Posted 21 May 2004 - 09:26 AM

If I did not include the ", Ohio" and variations, I would also get everything that had happened in one of these places too:

Vinton, Plumas, California
Vinton, Benton, Iowa
Vinton, Cowley, Kansas
Vinton, Calcasieu, Louisiana
Vinton, Clay, Mississippi
Vinton, Gallia, Ohio
Vinton, El Paso, Texas
Vinton, Roanoke, Virginia
Vinton (historical), Nicholas, West Virginia
Vinton Heights, Roanoke, Virginia
Vinton Woods, Clayton, Georgia
Vinton Woods, Gaston, North Carolina
Vintondale, Cambria, Pennsylvania
Vintonton, Schoharie, New York

(I found them in the PlaceFinder, along with "Vinton, Vinton, Ohio")

Just try using only the county for a more common county name, I have Fayette County Iowa, Indiana, Illinois. Ohio and Pennsylvania, there are several others too.
Alfred

#15 Guest_Wylma_*

Guest_Wylma_*
  • Guests

Posted 21 May 2004 - 10:42 AM

Alfred and Bill:

Thank you both for the clear instructions. I immediately tried all of the suggestions and intend to wear out my printer today. I hadn't realized the flexibility that is available for the lists. I'm a very happy genealogist today thanks to you.

Wylma

#16 dixieboy

dixieboy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 27 May 2004 - 05:52 AM

From the converstions I've had with the people at the Family History Library in SLC, the standard for place names is four levels, going from the smallest to the largest - 1) city, 2) county, 3) state and 4) country. They told me that any event that happened in the USA the country level doesn't have to be shown, but outside of the USA it needs to be shown. It seems that in the Midwest and Eastern US townships have a quasi-governmental status, and in Europe the same goes for Parishes. Whatever works in those 4 levels would still be within the standard and you need to make sure that if a level isn't known that it be shown with commas, such as Bedford, , Yorkshire, England.

#17 diamondk

diamondk

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 27 May 2004 - 08:02 AM

I cannot speak for all midwest or eastern states but my experience with Michigan is townships are not quasi-governmental bodies; They are fully functioning government bodies. Also, in Louisiana, parishes are fully functional governmental bodies, in this case, taking the place of counties. I again make the request that the the option of "freeform" place identification be kept as the primary method of adding places.

#18 jjmick

jjmick

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 27 May 2004 - 02:03 PM

Fully understand the desire for "freeform" in some cases. The problem is that everyone's "freeform" entry style may not be the same due to their personal preferences. What I would still like to see is the option to select between "freeform", and multiple "standardized" formats. Good example: prior to the 1940's many folks, in the US, were born, lived and died on farms. They didn't live in a "city". Birth place should read: Farm, Section 517, Hall Township, Pearce County, Iowa, USA. Unless the data entry system is standardized to utilized the maximum amount of info something will be missed.

My 2 cents worth. The more detail the better I like it because it can provide more possibilities for verification of data and [possible leads for further research.