TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2000-09 > 0967833839


From: "Grace Nezworski" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] RE: Land Tags
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:43:59 -0500
References: <4d.4f487d.26e13da0@aol.com>


Thanks for your comments, Frankie. I am trying to think the manner of
handling this type of information. When I first started a few weeks ago I
wasn't too concerned about the sentence structures because I though you
could always override it. The main thing I was concerned with was the
Individual Detail rather than the Narrative.

Much of my material comes from my own designed Data Base for my Apple IIC
which only translated to Text when I went to my Mac. I have been cutting
and pasting from that MSWord text into the various Memo fields. I also try
to use the name as it is written in the document. One of the things I found
most attractive about TMG was the ability to link all those other names -
witnesses, 2nd party to Conveyances, etc etc. Not only were they frequently
relatives, but if I notice names appearing frequently in many documents I
consider them clues to unknown extended family. I have also found and kept
notes on records that my ancestors witnessed as it was often critical to
establish they were or were/not in a particular locality at a set date. I
have two lines that use the same given name through several generations. My
brother is the sixth of the name James (father to son) One of my
grandmother's brothers was the sixth to bear the name John.(father to son).
I have now started a 'signature collection' (if I can find one) to try to
keep records straight. Ialso keep the land descriptions as precise as I can
to aid this process.

As I have gone deeper into the program, I am wondering if I should be so
indifferent. I will appreciate anyone else's thought on this subject.

Grace

----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: [TMG] RE: Land Tags


> Grace,
>
> Re your question on how I handle the Grantor and Grantee. I believe this
is a
> very individual, person, choice. I write out my own Sentences in the Tag
> Entry screen. Sometimes I use grantor and or grantee as a principal or
other
> principal, and sometimes I do not. In my personal preference, it depends
on
> whether they are family or inlaws or neighbors. If I have a man selling
land
> and a wife relinquishing her dower right to it, for example, I will make
them
> the principal and other principal, although I mostly write out their names
> and do not use [P] and [PO]. One of the reasons for this is that, often,
the
> Clerks of Court wrote down names as they sounded or *thought* they were
> spelled and not as the person *signed* their name. In *all* of my records,
I
> put the actual way the names were written into TMG. If the recorded name
was
> different from the person's signature, I put the recorded name in italics.
>
> What I put in the Sentence is the grantor and grantee, the date, the
> location, the waterway (in very early deeds), the legal description (if it
is
> not a metes and bounds description), and sometimes the adjoining land
owners
> or witness/witnesses. This really varies on the particular situation.
> Generally, in the early deeds, I put the waterway (river, creek, etc.)
detail
> field below the date field.
>
> What you should know is that I've had a problem with this way of doing
things
> because, when I print an Individual Detail Report, the Sentences *do not
> print*. I am trying to request that Wholly Genes make adding the Sentences
to
> this report an option, since this is the report I use to exchange data
with
> other researchers (when we are trying to find a "lost" cemetery, for
example).
>
> My advice would be to think about this before you make a decision. I made
my
> decisions on this some years ago, then I converted to TMG from another
> program. I could not possibly go back and change thousands and thousands
of
> tags, and I am not clear on how other people deal with inputting land data
> and not having the Sentences print out. Perhaps others could provide
advice
> or examples on this.
>
> Hope this helps you out a little.
>
> Frankie
>

This thread: