TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-08 > 1028214083


From: Terry Reigel <>
Subject: [TMG] Source standards -- was Mills Source for Memorial?
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 11:02:02 -0400
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020731220425.0211f560@pop3.norton.antivirus> <5.1.0.14.2.20020801085300.030fdc40@pop3.norton.antivirus> <002601c23980$17e55da0$45cfd043@oemcomputer>


Lew wrote:

> I agree. I think that we need a new computer friendly standard. All
> sources should be entered beginning with the most general to the most
> specific. That is, all details should be considered proper if entered in
> the CD. That means that a source for a census would not begin with the name
> of the head of household. It would be included in the CD.

I don't agree with this -- I think we need to insist that computers produce people friendly
results. In other words, we shouldn't adapt the standards so it's easy for the computer; we
should adapt the computer to suit human needs. So the standard should be one that makes good
sense to people. I'm not claiming Mill's standards are necessarily the best in that regard,
but she did explain the logic of her construction. Any new standard should be based on at
least as good logic in human terms. Then the computer programs need to deal with it.

In the meantime, it isn't really such a big deal (unless you intend to publish in Ms. Mills'
journal <g>). So do what makes sense to you with the tools you have, making sure you include
enough to find the source again and explain how you got from the evidence in the source to
your entry.

My 2 cents <g>

Terry Reigel

This thread: