>, I think one has to look at the media in which one is making the presentation. Perhaps ideally this shouldn't matter, but it does, and I would contend that web pages are much more a visual form than a book. >I also find that there is nothing worse than a web page full of written detail, and I am as guilty as anybody as simply not reading it! In which case a collection of full citations at the bottom of an individual's web page is unlikely to be read at all.
Gee, isn't it fascinating, the infinite variety in the ways human beings assess every situation? :) >I feel that my potential cousin has not developed a sufficient standard of proof for his analysis to be acceptable. The problem is created because in that area there are numerous people of approximately the same age with the same first name (Thomas) who married an Ann. The classic problem. > Additionally this makes the assumption that my Thomas married, and not all of the pre-marital deaths have been eliminated at this stage. And classic mistakes, especially the latter--which is why the first tenet of the Genealogical Proof Standard calls for "reasonably exhaustive" research. >As far as I am concerned it is still work in progress. It sounds like you've made wise decision! Elizabeth ---------------------------------------------------------- Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG Hendersonville, Tennessee, USA *** 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
