Oops, I'm "citing" things too often. In my examples below where my examples say "citing citing" that second "citing" should not be there, e.g. my actual Subsequent Citation would read:
"Illinois Statewide Marriage Index, 1763-1900," entry for William F. Reid - Elizabeth Holland, citing Tazewell Co. Marriages, Vol 1, p. 37 --- On Mon, 3/30/09, Connie Sheets <clshee...@yahoo.com> wrote: > From: Connie Sheets <clshee...@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Effect of Master Source Overrides and Preventing > Disappearing Details in Subsequent Citations > To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com > Date: Monday, March 30, 2009, 6:14 PM > Ward, > > First, thanks to you and Ron for the reminder about Ctrl+i. > I also realized after posting that it is not just the > Subsequent Citations capability that would lead me to choose > Sourcewriter+Override instead of Basic; it also allows for a > properly formatted Bibliography. > > I misspoke when I indicated I was seeing a difference in > the handling of Subsequent Citations in the most recent > build; I had forgotten that I had moved details from the > "fields that disappear on subsequent citations" to > a field that "always appears." And _thank you_ > for your 4 groupings concept; that has helped me > tremendously in comprehending how Legacy is working and how > I can work with the templates to get the kind of Subsequent > Citations I want. > > I still agree with you and Jenny that I am baffled by why > the programmers would choose to design a system where an > Override at the Master Source level makes the Details fields > useless. Not logical (or apparent) at all. Perhaps there > is some technical reason? If that is the case, a Warning > type message when one overrides a Master Source would be > helpful. > > In any event, there are, it seems, three ways to get > Subsequent Citations that meet my needs. I haven't been > overriding Master Sources since our conversation in December > in the hope it was a bug that would be fixed, so this is > based upon experimentation with only a very few of the > templates. > > 1. Construct a Master Source Override with No Details > (e.g. Artifacts>Privately held, where the one detail > field available is one that apparently always disappears on > Subsequent Citations). This may require "fudging" > on what goes in which field of the Master Source. > > 2. If I can live with the way the Master Source itself > prints in Subsequent Citations, move details from a field > that disappears into a field that always appears. (No > override). Example: Marriage records>Found in > government records>Marriage registers>Created at > county level>Online database template: I moved > "citing Tazewell Co. Marriages, Vol 1, p. 37" from > the Credit Line field to the Item of Interest field, so that > I now get a subsequent citation that reads > > Illinois Secretary of State, "Illinois Statewide > Marriage Index, 1763-1900," database entry for William > F. Reid - Elizabeth Holland, citing citing Tazewell Co. > Marriages, Vol 1, p. 37 instead of > > Illinois Secretary of State, "Illinois Statewide > Marriage Index, 1763-1900," database entry for William > F. Reid - Elizabeth Holland > > 3. If I do not wish to live with the way the Master Source > prints in Subsequent Citations _and_ I want details _and_ I > can't make a Master Source Override alone meet my needs, > then I must override at the Details level and check the box > "Use this customized Subsequent Citation in > reports." That was the only way I could construct the > following Subsequent Citation: > > "Illinois Statewide Marriage Index, 1763-1900," > entry for William F. Reid - Elizabeth Holland, citing citing > Tazewell Co. Marriages, Vol 1, p. 37 > > As best as I can figure out, you can achieve almost any > subsequent citation you want with method #3, though it is > time-consuming if you need to use the same format multiple > times but with many varying Details. Using Clipboard then > editing the Detail in the more "free-form" Detail > Override screen helps a bit. > > Are there other ways I haven't figured out? (This of > course only relates to Footnotes in narrative reports; > Endnotes in such reports plus Family Group Sheet, Individual > Reports etc. still do not have Subsequent Citation > capability, which I assume is still a bug? Or have we also > been told that is also by design?) > > Connie > > > --- On Sun, 3/29/09, Ward Walker > <wnkwal...@rogers.com> wrote: > > > From: Ward Walker <wnkwal...@rogers.com> > > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] The effect of Master Source > Overrides > > To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com > > Date: Sunday, March 29, 2009, 5:06 PM > > Connie, you have answered my question about why use > > SourceWriter+Override instead of Basic: i.e., in > order to > > take advantage of the subsequent citation form. I see > that > > the template called "add a generic source > here" is > > not really all that generic/simple, but it appears > that one > > might as well use _any_ template, when the intention > is to > > override with your own free-form text. > > > > By 'fudge' a template, as opposed to using the > > override feature, I meant what has been previously > discussed > > about using the fields of the template creatively, not > > necessarily entering what the prompts suggest. Where > this > > breaks down is for certain fields that have automatic > text > > or punctuation that cannot be removed/rewritten. As > Jenny > > says, it would be nice to be able to use most of a > template > > and only override certain fields. (At the expense of > more > > complexity and potential confusion.) > > > > It strikes me that using the Detail Override fields > would > > have the same problem as the ongoing bug with normal > > subsequent citations. Every instance of that master > source, > > after the first one, will be treated as subsequent, > > regardless of which details are changing in each > detailed > > citation. There is no mechanism to spell out all of > the > > details when they differ significantly from the > previous > > full citation. > > > > I think of a template-driven citation as consisting of > 4 > > groupings of fields: > > - master fields that always appear > > - master fields that disappear on subsequent > citations > > - detail fields that always appear > > - detail fields that disappear on subsequent > citations > > > > It's that last one that's the rub. These > fields > > currently disappear on any subsequent citation of the > master > > source. I want them to reappear in certain cases, as > we > > discussed a few weeks ago. (The rules for such cases > will be > > complicated.) > > > > Connie, are you now seeing a change in this aspect, > > compared to what you saw in December? > > > > (As for the italics, the Cntl+i method appears to > work.) > > > > Ward > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 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
