TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2000-01 > 0946857315


From: Lee Hoffman/KY <>
Subject: Re: TMG-L: Source Surety Values
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2000 18:55:15 -0500


Connie Sheets wrote:
>As a relatively experienced genealogical researcher, new to TMG (and still
>trying to decide whether I will completely abandon a large database in BK
>for TMG), with a bias that the best genealogical report is produced with a
>word processor, I'd like to request a discussion of the surety codes.
>
>How do you use them?

I use them for the purpose for which they were designed -- a memory device
for _me_ (a surety assigned by someone else is almost useless) to help
remind me quickly of the relative reliability of the data and/or Source.
I also use it to specify which data to be included in various reports --
depending on my needs and why I am producing the report.

My (and probably most users of them) application of surety values is based
on my own definition of the values. My definition is based on the
definitions given in the TMG Manual (which are taken from the standard
definitions used in GEDCOM and other programs). However, since values are
assigned subjectively, each user's definition is likely to be different
from other users.

>What practical benefits do they give you?

As mentioned above in the first paragraph. Also the presence of Surety
Values is indicative of data that is supported by some kind of documentation.

>How many of you ignore them completely (i.e. make no attempt to assign a
>value)?

I cannot answer for everyone and you won't hear from everyone, but you'll
get a variety of answers. From prior discussions, I would say that most
TMG users apply sureties to their datasets -- I can't support it but
probably better than 75% of the users use sureties.

>My initial inclination is to do the latter, as they seem to me both too
>subjective and too restrictive, and I can't conceive of a practical use I
>would have for them. I have discovered on many occasions that sources
>which "should" be accurate are not, whereas those which "should" be less
>accurate are closer to the truth. These discoveries come from finding and
>analyzing all available sources and looking at the big picture, usually not
>from any one piece of data from any single source that I might label a "3"
>surety.

Yes, they are subjective, and some want a greater range (i.e., less
restrictive). Keep in mind that Sources have a general surety as well as
the various data in the Source having surety values assigned. For example,
a death certificate is a primary source and would have a general surety of
three. The date and place of death would normally be assigned a surety of
3. But the death certificate is not a primary source for date and place of
birth and this data would thus be assigned a lower surety value -- a 2, a 1
or even a 0.

Certain information found on the census records would be similar depending
on the enumerator, the person furnishing the information and the kind of
information as well as when the actual enumeration was made (before, after,
or on the prescribed date).

A published family history would probably be (on the whole) a secondary
source at best. As you evaluate that source, you must determine how
reliable the contained data is in relation to other information that you
know from primary sources. If you find that a 1890s family history is
prone to errors, you may decide to reduce the overall surety that you
assign to the Source. Specific data may be assigned higher surety values,
but you will probably assign a lower value to most data because you know
that the source has many errors. It is this last that is really useful for
me when I review data and sources years later.

>The only one that makes much sense to me is the negative value, but even
>then I think I'd be more likely to explain in a Note/Memo why I know the
>info is erroneous.

Again one of the uses for sureties (for me) is what data is included in
reports. Thus I may exclude data with low or negative sureties.

Hope this helps -


----------
Lee Hoffman/KY
E-mail:
My website: <http://www.users.mis.net/~lhoffman>;
--------------
A user of the best genealogy program, The Master Genealogist (TMG)

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TMG-L The Internet Mailing List for The Master Genealogist
To unsubscribe: Send an e-mail to with 'UNSUBSCRIBE TMG-L'
or... if you get the digest version: 'UNSUBSCRIBE TMG-L-DIGEST'
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

This thread: