Ron,
In answer to your first paragraph only...
I could see how you could do this in a relational database by having a starting 
and ending date for each location together with it's approximate grid position. 
 When entering a location a lookup to that table will provide a consistent 
location.
It does beg two major questions.
1) Who owns the master list?
2) What level of detail does this location permit
In FreeBMD they already provide cut-off dates for changes in UK Parish 
boundaries, which I have, for my own Genealogy, converted to a relational 
database.  This I suspect, is one of many such instruments that people 
use...Spreadsheet, documents etc.
The User Group does not have a consensus on what to put in the location ( I go 
down to street number and name - as that is what I found at the time). There 
has been a push for some time to conform to the USA 4 field standard, with, I 
believe, no success outside of the USA.  May I suggest either a 3rd tier to the 
Location Table: Long, Short, World Standard or drop the short name in place of 
a World Standard.  The World Standard would be the Current Location and Grid 
Position, which would necessitate enough fields to conform to what each Country 
now considers it's Location to be.  This World Standard would also have an 
effective date indicating when it became that location.  When it changes, the 
old standard will be moved into an historical record identifying start and 
ending dates.

The key is ownership.  Without that, anarchy rules and we all do our own thing. 
 Which is where we are now!
Alan Pereira

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Taylor [mailto:doit4...@yahoo.com]
Sent: 17 November 2011 13:14
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Locations

I've commented before about time sensitive location names.  This is a very 
simple problem which can easily be solved with database tools.  When 
programming at BYU, the university had many codes which were used for various 
purposes.  By combining the code with its context, it was easy to determine 
what the code meant at a particular time and in a specific setting.  The same 
could be done with locations.  If the lattitude and longitude were stored as 
pointers in the individual records, marriage records, event records, etc. then 
a simple lookup of that point on the map coupled with the time frame could 
retrieve what it was called at that point in time and in whatever language you 
wish it.  By similar logic, you could find a location in the Master Locations 
table and then have another "show list" function to display all the alternate 
names for that referenced geo point.  The alternates would not have to be in 
the notes for every location but rather they  would come from a table similar 
to the Geo Database.  This might also provide a better way to verify locations 
than the current method of the "county verifier" as it could be made functional 
for all areas of the world.  In summary, I would always find the current 
location in whatever language I might be using and then have it verified 
against a Geo Database type of table.  Then I would have an option that I could 
check to show all locations in their time-sensitive name or in the current name 
or possibly both.

While I'm at it, I'll give one more possibility that would be easy to 
implement.  The locations table should not have any of what I call "location 
modifiers".  Legacy calls them "prepositions" even though some of them are not 
actually considered such.  They are words like near, of, from, probably, and 
many more.  To correct this situation, it would require another table of these 
location modifiers that the user could add to if necessary and then in the 
individual record, marriage record, event record, etc. there would be a 
pull-down for the location modifiers next to each location field.  The default 
would be blank or none but if a location modifier were selected, the pointer 
for it would be in the record and associated with the field that it modifies.  
That way, all locations in the Master Locations table could be verified because 
none would have location modifiers in them.  I realize that even though these 
mechanisms might be easy to visualize that  they may require some major 
re-programming but the method would be very consistent and allow for each 
location to be listed just once.

Ron Taylor



Legacy User Group guidelines:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/
Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/
Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp
Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our 
blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com).
To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp




Legacy User Group guidelines:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/
Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/
Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp
Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our 
blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com).
To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp


Reply via email to