TMG-L Archives

From: "Harry Goegebeur" <>
Subject: [TMG-L:] RE: TMG-L: Automated Relatedness Calculation
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 09:00:43 +0200
In-Reply-To: <39356522.A2487FA@infoave.net>

Hello Richard,

> Although you quote Jeff, I will respond since I started this thread.

You're welcome...
> The use of the reference field and automatic numbers should be like any
> other option. If you like it, use it. If you don't, don't. If the
> computer generates the numbers, I can see no reason why it could not
> place the results wherever the user chooses. For me the reference field
> is for reference numbers but I see no reason why it must be done by
> hand.

In this way I agree totally. I started 27 years ago with my genealogy and
that time we worked with paper and I used as reference a combination of
Kekule numbering and the Henry numbering. Since it was my genealogy I
started with myself being I-1 the Roman numbers are the generations the
other the ancestor numbers. My father is II-2 and mother is II-3 and so on.
For the 'side branches' of my 'tree' I do the following my younger brother
becomes the reference II-2B and his children are II2B-1 and II2B-2. I
created this system in the days of Roots (II and 3) where we could not use
non-DOS characters and no '.' In the reference field. I will be in trouble
when one of the individuals has more then 26 children (then I am out of
characters).
These references are unique (in Roots we got a warning when it was not) and
I also use them for my external connected files (pictures, text files). It
works fine for me because I start from one person. If you have several
different families in your database I think you can have an equal system but
starting from the progenitor (key individual) of that family.
Kind regards
Harry

Richard

Harry Goegebeur wrote:
>
> Verzonden: woensdag 31 mei 2000 14:50
> Aan:
> Onderwerp: Re: TMG-L: Re: Automated Relatedness Calculation
>
> Jeff Owens wrote:
>
> > I have noted this same problem with other software used before TMG, and
> > likewise wonder why there couldn't be a more meaningful number system
> > used.
>
> > The ideal situation would be one where the source individual is
> > selected, and among optional numbering systems one of these also
> > selected, and then all individuals are assigned a number based on these
> > parameters.
>
> Excuse me but I do not like the idea that the program assigns a value to
the
> reference field. IMHO this field should have it's original meaning and
that
> is a reference field for the researcher to fill in.
> Kind regards
> Harry
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> 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'
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
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'
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:

• [TMG-L:] RE: TMG-L: Automated Relatedness Calculation by "Harry Goegebeur" <>