Elizabeth,
I agree entirely with your post, and of course, already use full names in
subsequent citations where surnames are the same. :-)
Just one thing about the letter template in Legacy. It assumes that the
'holder' of the letter is the recipient, which of course need not
necessarily be the case - but then I suppose one should use the 'historical'
letter template. The default also refers to the holder of the letter by
surname only, even in the initial 'Footnote/Endnote Citation'.
I have not had need to use the 'historical letter' template, but thought I
would just have a look (half way through writing this email). Guess what!
For subsequent citations it displays full names as the default! Obviously a
case of "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Happy
days! :-) :-)
Elizabeth wrote:
> It all goes back to what I wrote in an earlier post, quoting from EE 2.1
about citation being an art, not a science. Good artists learn the
principles of art--form, texture, shape, color, etc.--then adapt those
principles as needed to capture the essence of whatever they want to paint.
Just a little issue here, about the analogy - sometimes it is what *they*
want to paint rather than how it will necessarily impact on their audience.
(So the citation may be the result of the adaptation of all those good
principles, and is clear to the writer but not necessarily clear to other
people.) An artist will produce a work of art based upon the principles of
his trade, yes, but the resultant work will have a different impact on every
person viewing (or listening to) that work. The music of John Cage, no
doubt was composed with the principles of the art, but is not necessarily
understood or appreciated by many people. And then, there's Mozart, who was
quite blatant (I paraphrase, for fear of offence to some - when talking
about a series of certain pieces of music he had composed): I cannot say it
will be popular, but don't really care much one way or the other. To quote
a well known, but old song, "I did it my way"! Fortunately, for all our
sakes, most artists aim to please, which is what Elizabeth is getting at
here.
Anyway, I will need to unsubscribe later on today, or tomorrow at the
latest, until about the second week in Jan. so I can concentrate on imposing
my artistic interpretations of Christmas music on my unsuspecting audiences.
Have a good Christmas everyone - hope to be back reading all those posts in
January (Oh No! - I can hear you say).
With very best wishes
David
*****************************************************
David S Brookes
Musical Director, The Brewood Singers
www.brewoodsingers.co.uk
Organist & Choirmaster, Polesworth Abbey
www.polesworthabbey.co.uk
*****************************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 11 December 2008 04:04
To: Legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Master Source Subsequent Citation Issue
David wrote:
>This is specifically to do with the 'Letter' template, but may well be
applicable to other templates. If you fill in the field boxes 'correctly',
at the end of the Footnote/Endnote Citation, the information could read:
"privately held by Brookes" and the Subsequent Citation could read "Brookes
to Brookes, 11 Mar 2008". Apart from the issue that I hate being referred
to by my surname, there are many Brookes surnames in my database, therefore
the clarity one hopes to achieve by being consistent with sources has
straight away been compromised. To override the source citation would mean
it would no longer conform to the 'suggested standard format'.
David,
IMO all rules are meant to be broken, or at least bent -- but only if we
understand why the rule exists and when it is best to follow it. If we bend
a rule at the wrong time or in the wrong way, it will come back and slap
us--or sneakily undermine us for the rest of our work, without us realizing
why we keep hitting that proverbial "brick wall."
The convention of using only surnames to identify letter writers in
subsequent (short-form) citations is part and parcel of the convention that
when we cite authors, we use only surnames to identify them in subsequent
citations. Dropping the first name and using only the last is one of the
standard ways that the "short-form" citation is created.
However, common sense also has to be applied. If you have two authors or
letter-writers named Jones whom you are citing, then--obviously--your
subsequent citation has to distinguish which Jones you are referring to in
this particular citation. The common-sense approach, which is also the
standard, is to use the writer's full name in the short cite. There is
nothing wrong with doing that.
It all goes back to what I wrote in an earlier post, quoting from EE 2.1
about citation being an art, not a science. Good artists learn the
principles of art--form, texture, shape, color, etc.--then adapt those
principles as needed to capture the essence of whatever they want to paint.
Good researchers learn the principles of citation and then adapt those to
fit the quirks of each record or each situation.
Of course, there are genealogists who actually prefer rigid formats they can
follow without deviating one jot or tittle. Then they can be oh-so-confident
that they are being "perfect," without having to worry about it (or without
actually having to "waste time" learning those principles :).
And, at the other end of the spectrum, others want no "rules" at all,
thinking "I'm intelligent and have common sense, so of course I'll do what's
needed." But, then, as their experience deepens and broadens, they come to
realize that their earlier assumptions as to what was needed didn't cover a
lot of things they now wish they had known to include.
Been there. Done that. All of it! For most of us, it's part of the
metamorphosis we go through as we explore more new materials, more cultures,
and more regions.
So, David, go right ahead and use full names for all your letter writers,
and if anyone says "Tsk! Tsk!", then quote Ralph Waldo Emerson (instead of
Winston Churchill): "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little
minds."
Elizabeth
----------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG
Hendersonville, TN
*** Holiday discounts on Legacy 7.0, add-ons, books, and more. Visit
http://tinyurl.com/65rpbt. ***
Legacy User Group guidelines:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
Archived messages:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/
Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp
To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
*** Holiday discounts on Legacy 7.0, add-ons, books, and more. Visit
http://tinyurl.com/65rpbt. ***
Legacy User Group guidelines:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
Archived messages:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/
Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp
To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
