GENBOX-L Archives

Archiver > GENBOX > 2003-09 > 1063514743


From: Kathy Lenerz <>
Subject: Re: [GENBOX] Higher and Lower Sources
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 00:46:34 -0400
References: <CHEMKKAJHOKJPIEOPLKDEECMEJAA.clcasper@sprynet.com>


Cheri-
Didn't Bill say a short while back that the Lead Text area wasn't
intended for that use? Perhaps that's why when I tried what you
suggested, it produced the same results that Beth is trying to deal
with. When I put the verbatim text in the Lead Text for more than one
event, it printed out multiple times. I think ibids only take the rest
of the footnote into account. I would like to reserve annotations for
actual annotations, i.e., notes about the text, conflicting data, and
how I reached my conclusions. If I put both the verbatim text and the
annotation in the Annotation field, and if I want separate annotations
for the different events using the same citation, the verbatim text will
always print out. . . I don't seem to be able to figure out how to have
it all. It would all be simple if there were an Evidence box in the
citation window.
Kathy

Cheri Casper wrote:
> Kathy - What you are trying to accomplish does not require separate sources.
> Nor are you bound to using the Evidence area since you don't think that will
> work for you. Therefore, I would suggest that you use either the Lead Text
> field or the Annotation field and put in the exact info that you want there.
> Just make one higher source for your newspaper and design it so that you can
> use the CD field for the date and page number. Then put the verbatim text
> in the Annotation or Lead Text field.
>
> However, you can use either of the two other options. All three -- lead
> text, evidence, annotations -- can be used conjunctively. This, combined
> with your actual CD, gives you what amounts to 4 CD fields. They are just
> labelled differently in this program. You might want to read the Help file
> on this.
>
> Once you get the hang of this, you will find it vastly superior to having to
> remember which CD you have allocated to which iota of data. Sourcing is one
> of the reasons this satisfied GB user made the switch.
>
> CheriC
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kathy Lenerz [mailto:]
> Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 7:39 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [GENBOX] Higher and Lower Sources
>
>
> I have been reading this thread with interest. Conceptually, using
> multi-level sourcing seems to make sense. Practically, I have a harder
> time with it. My concern is that it seems to require a lot more data
> entry work.
>
> Here is my situation: I have a number of higher level sources from which
> I extract information: church record books, vital records entered in
> registers, newspaper articles and tidbits. What I would really like to
> do with these is have one higher level source and enter the citation AND
> text in the citation box/window. However, there is no place to enter
> text there. Therefore, I have to choose whether to make each baptismal
> entry or newspaper tidbit a separate source or whether to create a
> superordinate source, with these as lower level documents. To give you
> an idea of the magnitude of these "documents," here are a few examples:
>
> Baptismal entry:
> Die vigesima quarta xbris 2a. matin natus et eadem renatus est Michael
> filius legitimus Adami Lenert custodis ovium et Annae Mariae Scheer
> conjugum ex Britten. Levantibus Michaele Schuligen et Helena Brausch
> adolescenta, ambobus ex Britten.
>
> Newspaper item:
> Mr. John Baltes is having a large barn built this fall. Master
> carpenter John Schwarz is doing the work.
>
> Newspaper item:
> Mrs. John Lenertz is still on the sick list.
>
> I have dozens of baptismal entries from the same register and hundreds
> of newspaper items from the same newspaper.
>
> It would make conceptual sense to decide that a baptismal entry,
> marriage entry, or newspaper piece is a lower level "document" in a
> higher level source, and use multi-level sourcing. Practically,
> however, this requires setting up a new (lower level) source for each
> 9-word item from a newspaper, and coming up with a name for each such
> sentence from the gossip column. (As an aside, this was a GREAT place
> to obtain information!)
>
> The alternative would be to just use the newspaper, baptismal register,
> or vital record register as a higher-level source, entering all extracts
> consecutively on the same evidence page. In order to keep all these
> extracts straight, however, this method would require labeling them all,
> e.g., date and page no. Since the date and page number are already
> entered in the citation record, this is double entry of the same
> information. Plus, I think that it would be cumbersome to have to
> scroll through hundreds of entries to find what one wants.
>
> Both of these methods seem like a lot more work than what I am used to
> in the "other" program-- enter both the citation detail and extract on
> the citation entry screen.
>
> As I try out this program, this seems like one major stumbling block to
> me. Any thoughts on this situation or my thinking here would be
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Kathy

This thread: