I am reviewing approximately 3000 sources in Reunion. Decisions I make now will represent a lot of work and changes later will be a lot of work. I'd like to think things through completely before beginning to edit my Sources.
Are there any advantages to entering data on a field by field basis, as opposed to just typing the whole source in the preferred format?
I am trying this out with a few sources, which have only two fields. One to be included as the end note and the other to be excluded from the endnote.
I am use the free form text area for the details of the transcription, in case I need to refer to it at a future date (which I do with surprising frequency). I check the box, exclude from endnotes for the free form text.
The included field I call citation, and it has all of citation information, typed in manually in a consistent format after the Chicago style. The citation is typed into this single field called citation, in its entirety.
The excluded second field is called file name. The file name field is where I record the file name of my copy of the source, usually a pdf or jpeg, or details about accessing the source that are not part of the citation, such as where the photocopy is located, the name and address of the genealogist who consulted the primary documents and sent me copies, etc.
The other way I might do this is to create separate fields for the information and enter it into each field.
Is there any advantage to creating separate fields for the source?
Are there any advantages to entering data on a field by field basis, as opposed to just typing the whole source in the preferred format?
I am trying this out with a few sources, which have only two fields. One to be included as the end note and the other to be excluded from the endnote.
I am use the free form text area for the details of the transcription, in case I need to refer to it at a future date (which I do with surprising frequency). I check the box, exclude from endnotes for the free form text.
The included field I call citation, and it has all of citation information, typed in manually in a consistent format after the Chicago style. The citation is typed into this single field called citation, in its entirety.
The excluded second field is called file name. The file name field is where I record the file name of my copy of the source, usually a pdf or jpeg, or details about accessing the source that are not part of the citation, such as where the photocopy is located, the name and address of the genealogist who consulted the primary documents and sent me copies, etc.
The other way I might do this is to create separate fields for the information and enter it into each field.
Is there any advantage to creating separate fields for the source?
Comment