TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2004-07 > 1088931757


From: "Lee Kaiwen" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] RE: Assigning ID Numbers
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 17:02:37 +0800
In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.2.20040702092908.056082c0@pop3.norton.antivirus>


From: Lee Hoffman [mailto:]

>Jill Morelli wrote:

>> I agree completely with what Tim and Paul have
>> so coherently laid out.

OK, I've noticed this before, but when it starts happening in MY thread,
then it's getting PERSONAL.

Lost messages. I just received this message from Lee, quoting Jill, who
mentions Tim and Paul. But the only messages I've received are Lee's and
Paul's (who also seems to have mentioned Tim's message). Neither Tim's nor
Jill's messages ever got to me. For that matter, neither has the reply I
sent to Paul found its way back. Did anyone see it? (And yes, I've checked
my junkmail filters, which has been a problem (Theresa Ghee Elliot's
messages always seem to wind up there, for some reason)). Has anyone else
had this problem? This is the only discussion list I have this problem with.

I really want to see Tim's message! Could someone forward it to me?

Now to Lee's message.

> My only source organization is that
> I have my father's line in one series
> and my mother's in another

Sorry, I'm afraid my first post confused this point. I am, in fact, planning
on organizing my sources in pretty much the standard way: largely by
document type, within which I'll just assign numbers as the documents come
in. The only thing I haven't yet decided is whether to separate by maternal
and paternal lines.

Where the numbering scheme comes into play is in the pedigree charts and
family group sheets. I won't be filing MOST of my sources by family group,
but there are some things I will be keeping with the group sheets, such as
research notes, some indices, and etc. And while it's true that I could just
let TMG assign random ID numbers to individuals and families, I don't want
it to, partly for asthetic, and partly for pragmatic, reasons, most of which
I laid out in my reply to Paul's message. I really DO want a numbering
scheme that both makes sense and is accessible without recourse to a
computer.

> I have actually been very pleased ...
> with TMG's ability to find the information

And this is what I don't want -- having to ask TMG to tell me where my
information is. It is certainly convenient and useful to be able to do so,
but I don't want to be dependent on TMG to locate stuff. My own personal
preference is for TMG to be an adjunct to my genealogical library, not vice
versa. I.e., I want a stand-alone library.

> I think you will spend more time worrying
> about the number than recording the information.

I've come up with a solution to the problem that prompted me to start this
thread (and Paul's message prompted me to find a solution to the other,
non-fatal, issue I hadn't yet addressed). The system seems now to meet my
three requirements: easy to implement, easy to access, and flexible (in
particular vis-à-vis collaterals, the problem that motivated me in the first
place). Being ahnentafel-based, the IDs almost assign themselves, meaning,
particularly, that I don't anticipate spending a lot of time worrying about
the number.

> Using my system, I have not had to re-number
> and thus re-file any documents based on adding
> newly found family members or relationships.

Again, let me clarify that I'm not planning to file my source documents by
ahnentafel, only pedigrees and family group folders.

I'm trying to put together a system that conveniently accommodates the usual
format of the genealogical enquiries I receive: begin with the pedigree,
move on to the family group sheet, and then, if needed, the source
documents.

E.g., Aunt Bertha wants information on her great-grandfather's line. Grab
the pedigree, flip to the first page, there he is -- my g-g-grandpa. Like as
not, everything she wants to know is on the pedigree. If not, then most
everything else will be on the group sheet, filed under g-g-grandpa's
ahnentafel (which we got off the pedigree). Only serious genealogists ever
ask to see sources (even I rarely need to look at them).

Perhaps I'm unique, but this has been my experience over the past twenty
years.

> Hope this helps

Yes, it does, tremendously. Thanks for your input.

Lee Kaiwen, Taiwan




This thread: