Rob,
Count me as one that uses the <> - but only for locations. Dates have
specific options that are understood by Legacy (Abt, Est, etc).
If RootsWeb or other destinations strip the , is that any worse
than leaving undocumented fields blank in the first place?
Using the <>
<>
In some programs, blank dates and places were filled in by the computer at
the upload site - Ancestral File from the LDS church was one that did this.
It is nice to have some sort of date and place, but the computer could get
worlds away and generations apart from the correct info, and it w
PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] "< >" brackets
Rob:
I was using angle brackets around estimated dates and places and thought it
was an excellent method until I discovered that RootsWeb's WorldConnect site
automatically omits anything betwe
Thanks for explanation Tom!
Rob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom
Montgomery
Sent: October 8, 2007 7:56 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] "< >" brackets
Brackets were the standard
Brackets were the standard when there were limitations as to field size.
Most have stopped using and you now see something like probably and
possibly. Many of the old DOS days programs spawned multiple ways to
abbreviate words, etc. Ever wonder about the many ways to abbreviate "Salt
Lake City" in
Rob:
I was using angle brackets around estimated dates and places and thought it
was an excellent method until I discovered that RootsWeb's WorldConnect site
automatically omits anything between angle brackets.
Kirsten
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
6 matches
Mail list logo
