Using the citation detail field with BDM certificates

[Teresa C]

Assuming the citation details field is used for indicating exactly where in a source you find the information you are referring to, I'm curious to know what people put in this field for, say, a birth certificate.

For a book, you might add the page number, for example.
I've seen some people use this field for citing the file number or document number of the certificate - but surely that's where you would find the certificate (source) in the repository, NOT where you would find the information (for example the birth date) in the source.
If you were using the citation detail for the file number of a certificate, shouldn't the source be the repository, or maybe even the index?

I guess it doesn't matter too much, as long as you're internally consistent....but I'd love to know what other people do :-)

[Michael Talibard]

Re: Using the citation detail field with BDM certificates

On source detail, I believe there are two contrasting policies that are each widely followed (though maybe some people are in between). One may call these the few sources policy (FSP) and the many (MSP).

For a book, FSP treats the whole book as the source, and puts anything further (e.g. page number) in the detail field. I assume that as many images are attached to the source as there are relevant pages. MSP treats the page as the source (usually just one image) and probably leaves the detail field empty. (This is what I prefer - my citation detail fields are mostly empty.) Similarly, MSP takes the certificate as the source.

You say it probably doesn’t matter much, but my observation is that in these pages more puzzles and problems arise from FSP than from MSP. These are usually to do with sorting, finding or transferring with gedcom.

[Teresa C]

Re: Using the citation detail field with BDM certificates

Thanks for your insights, Michael.

You highlight the internal struggle I am dealing with at the moment......in the past, I have used what you call MSP (love it!!!!). Effectively, I have created a "source" in Reunion that users of other software would call a "citation". I literally have thousands of sources which, if I followed Ben Sayer's practical citation, or FTMM3, or Elizabeth Shown Mills, would be reduced to far fewer sources with 1000's of citations.
I've been collecting sources for over 30 years now, and in the early days any piece of paper you laid your hands on was a "source".

My current frustration with the lack of upgrade to Reunion now has me looking at other options for software, and as a result I am confronted with FSP almost everywhere I turn.

A few months ago I was convinced I should go the FSP way.....purely because of the way that most other software manages source citations. But the deeper I get in to the implications of changing my approach, the more reluctant I am to embrace FSP.

From what I read on various forums, MSP is more problematic when it comes to transferring with GEDCOM, and this has been a key driver for me. If I had confidence that Reunion had a future and that we'd see an upgrade soon, I would just wait it out, as the basic functionality of the program is far superior to anything else on the market that I have tried. But I've been burned before with great programs like UFT and TMG that just could not keep up with developments in genealogical research, and I fear that at some point I will just have to transfer to another program.....hence the desire to make sure my sources are "safe" for GEDCOM transfer.

But for now, I might just sit on the fence between FSP and MSP..... :-)

[rclrocco]

Re: Using the citation detail field with BDM certificates

I'm very much in the "MSP" camp! For me, it is vital that when I quote a source, I or someone else knows exactly where to find that source, where it came from, when, and what is in it. General sources like , " a book" , or "Birth Certificate" or "Ships Passenger List" etc are meaningless later on. I don't put detail in the citation detail field, as it's all entered in the main fields of the source itself.
You don't sound very enamoured with Reunion, Teresa when you write, "if I had confidence that Reunion had a future" . Not sure what you base this on, but Reunion has been around for almost as long as FH software has been available, and for me is still my favourite, and I don't really look at other software. You have access to several of the authors of the software via ReunionTalk and an international network of satisfied users. From where I sit, Reunion's future looks as sound as most software.
You talk of upgrades, or rather the lack of one. It's easy to get sucked into the "must progress" and "must have the latest and greatest", much as Apple insists on bringing out phone upgrades most years, when I've just about learnt how to use the last one. Family History has been around since the dawn of time, and software is just a recent tool to help with the hobby. Upgrades aren't everything. Just see how a skilled joiner turns out beautiful work using old hand tools. He or she doesn't need the latest swanky tools to produce good work, and its the same with Reunion

[Teresa C]

Re: Using the citation detail field with BDM certificates

You don't sound very enamoured with Reunion, Teresa when you write, "if I had confidence that Reunion had a future" . Not sure what you base this on, but Reunion has been around for almost as long as FH software has been available, and for me is still my favourite, and I don't really look at other software. You have access to several of the authors of the software via ReunionTalk and an international network of satisfied users. From where I sit, Reunion's future looks as sound as most software.
You talk of upgrades, or rather the lack of one. It's easy to get sucked into the "must progress" and "must have the latest and greatest", much as Apple insists on bringing out phone upgrades most years, when I've just about learnt how to use the last one. Family History has been around since the dawn of time, and software is just a recent tool to help with the hobby. Upgrades aren't everything. Just see how a skilled joiner turns out beautiful work using old hand tools. He or she doesn't need the latest swanky tools to produce good work, and its the same with Reunion

It's not that I'm not enamoured with Reunion, Rupert - as I said, I think it's the best on the market! And I'm not interested in upgrades for upgrades sake, either.......I just think that it's important that development occurs. I don't think we need an upgrade every 6 months like other programs, but technology moves so quickly these days that not having an upgrade for 2 years just makes me nervous :-).
I've been using software for genealogy since Roots (that most be nearly 25 years ago now!) and I stuck with each program until it was discontinued. Continuity of data is of utmost importance to me, and I'm just trying to be prepared!
As long as Reunion is around, I will be using it! But that doesn't mean I won't do my utmost to make sure that my data is fully compatible with GEDCOM for any transfer I may have to make in the future :-)

[Teresa C]

Re: Using the citation detail field with BDM certificates

Looks like my concern is unwarranted :-)
Fabulous to see the the new version today - thanks Leister!
It looks great, and I am looking forward to exploring the new features.