TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2005-10 > 1128383143


From: Jennifer Reusser <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Wishlist for Exhibit Log
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 16:45:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20051003223311.027eced8@pop.sprynet.com>


--My webbased email client sets the reply-to against my will--

Darrell,

I recommended keeping the four fields (Topic, Reference (which I forgot to list earlier), Caption and Description) with the event/exhibit link because of the ways in which people currently use them.
Per Astrid's use of the current fields:
1. Topic = "type of Event - name of P1" (no quotes) (= different for each 'link') -
if it's a person exhibit it would be something like: Person - Doe, John
If it's an event exhibit: Marriage - Doe, John

2. Reference = Person ID# of P1 (if applicable = also different for each 'link')
3. Caption = English or German (= different for each Event 'link')
4. Description if needed (also English or German = different for each Event 'link')


I would also recommend adding a Master Caption, Topic & Description field to the master list: these could act like global sentences - they would display unless the user entered a "local" caption/topic/description.

Specific responses to your comments are inserted with *****

Jennifer Reusser

"Darrell A. Martin" <> wrote:

At 07:29 PM 10/3/2005, Jennifer Reusser wrote:

Hi, Jennifer:

And I reply, inserted and indented.

>My thoughts based on what Astrid and Darrell seem to want - and since I would like to see a combination of the two:
>
>Master Exhibit/Image (Source) List:
> Record number (TMG internal use only - links based on this)
> Path to file (for external exhibits; can be unique but doesn't have to be)

It does not make any sense to me to have a
"Master Image List" record that points to
more than one image file. Or are you saying
the program should allow for multiple
"versions" of the same image? I would need
more detail before I would agree, and I'm
inclined to say I wouldn't.

*****On further reflection, I would have to agree with you on this one.

> field(s) for storing internal exhibit info

What do you mean by that line? Except for
the path to the file, I don't see much
difference between an internal and an
external Image in the context of a "Master
Image List" and its data fields.

*****I believe that the way TMG currently handles internal and external images is one field stores the file path (external) and another field stores the internal exhibit info. If so, I don't see that part changing, just what table it is stored in. If I am incorrect, well then..

> User reference
> Date
> Place created
> Creator/Author/Artist
> Repository (MPL)
>
>Exhibit Link to Person or Event Tag:
> pretty much the same as the current structure except links to the Master Exhibit/Image (Source) List instead of directly linking to the external exhibit or holding the internal exhibit

If I understand what you said, I think I
agree with it. The (internal) "MIL" record
number would be substituted for the file
location (external), or whatever method
an internal exhibit uses (may already be
something quite close).

*****Exactly - except that the internal exhibit data is currently stored in the same exhibit/event table resulting in multiple copies of the data if it is linked to more than one person or event.

> contains info to link to person or event tag and specific info like:
> Title/Caption
> Description
> Topic

I don't agree that the "topic" of an Image
is related to its link as an exhibit to a
person or Tag, if by "topic" you mean the
subject matter (content) of the Image. The
topic is not *altered* in any way by the
link; so this data belongs to the Image
record, not the person or Tag record.

If you mean something else, then I would
need to know what you mean by "topic" to
know if I agreed.

*****See above for the example Astrid gave. I personally probably would not need a unique topic for each exhibit/event link, but I can vaguely see where someone else might.

Conceptually, that information about an
Image which does not change because of
its use as an exhibit to a person or Tag
should be stored with the "MIL" record.
That which requires the context of a link
and which changes (or might change) from
link to link should be stored with the
person or Tag link instead.

*****Oh agreed!

I imagine that many TMG users will find
creative ways to "bend the design" as
soon as it comes out. But real design
flaws at the start can grow into monster
problems later. "Census people" seem to
be a good method for some, for example;
but it would have been a bad idea, IMHO,
to construct a "person record" with the
idea that it needed to be able to stand
for a "census", or a "ship", or whatnot.

> Reference
>
>Jennifer Reusser

Darrell


Darrell A. Martin
a native Vermonter currently in exile in Illinois
http://www.darrell-martin.net/genealogy/


==== TMG Mailing List ====
The Wholly Genes FAQ page has information not only about TMG and how to obtain it, but helpful hints on using it.



This thread: