On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 20:16:09 -0700, "Kirsten Bowman" <vik...@rvi.net> wrote:
>But Laura, how do you account for pastors who couldn't spell or who >"latinized" infants' names? Should a baptismal record for "Fredrikus >Merkel" take precedence over a will signed in the man's own hand as >Frederick Markle--along with all the land and military records listing the >latter? With due respect, that seems to border on the pedantic. As long as >the baptismal version is recorded in the source notes, wouldn't it be >sensible to show the primary name as the one actually used by the >individual? The main point is that each piece of evidence needs to be recorded somewhere. Legacy forces us to choose one of the names as preferred. How do we choose? It might depend on the intended audience. If we were submitting a formal document to a genealogical society we might be given a set of publishing guidelines to follow (earliest documented reference perhaps). If we were publishing on the web with the intent of attracting long lost relatives, we might want to use the name that we think people would google for. <SOAPBOX> I've mentioned this before, but I believe Legacy could do with a redesign of its AKA handling. Allow the AKAs to be classified. Users can add their own classes with custom report sentences for each class. Allow AKAs to be flagged as "private". Allow user to choose which AKA class to use as the main name on screen, in a report, or on a web page. Etc. </SOAPBOX> -- Dennis Kowallek (LTools) http://zippersoftware.com/ltools http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ltools 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
