TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2005-10 > 1128524780


From: "Teresa Elliott" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Wishlist for Exhibit Log
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:06:20 -0500
In-Reply-To: <22697393.1128524396025.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>


Ah, I am starting to see how your idea would work.

I'd have my MIL (not to be confused with Mother In Law) with
Photo 1:
Photo 2:
Deed Scan A:
Deed Scan B:
Will Scan A:
Photo3:

Each would have a Default Caption, but that could be overridden at the
"local" level when attached to a person, tag, source, place, or repository.
I am assuming the Title would be default in the MIL, since it would not
change.
I'd have the photos and scans anywhere on my hard drive (Or hopefully
someday, DVD drive) and the pointer in the MIL would point to that location
on the hard drive.
I'd only need one pointer, because I could customize the caption at the
local level for each Illustration.
This sounds great, but doesn't sound like improvements to the old system,
but instead a major rewrite.

Teresa Ghee Elliott IBSSG
Rutherford County, TN Cemeteries
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rutherfordcemetery

-----Original Message-----
From: Darrell Martin [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 10:00 AM
To:
Subject: RE: [TMG] Wishlist for Exhibit Log

** my Web e-mail client sets "Reply To" against my will, sorry **

-----Original Message-----
From: Teresa Elliott <>
Sent: Oct 5, 2005 7:15 AM

That's what I was thinking. Then if Astrid (sorry Astrid) or someone else
wanted the same illustration, but with a different caption, they would just
have two illustrations in the Master Illustration list. Like I now have 200
census sources in my Master Source list.

Teresa Ghee Elliott IBSSG
Rutherford County, TN Cemeteries
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rutherfordcemetery

-----Original Message-----
From: Darrell A. Martin [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 7:27 PM

At 12:10 PM 10/4/2005, Teresa Elliott wrote:
>If there was a MASTER EVENT list, couldn't those that wanted various
>captions for the same photo not just have several copies of the same photo?
>It seems that would be preferable than various copies of the same photo
>every time you want to use a group photo as it is now.
>
>Teresa Ghee Elliott

Hi, Teresa:

I'm not sure what you mean. You seem to say that one thing is preferable to
itself. "... just have several copies of the same photo? It seems that would
be preferable than various copies of the same photo ..."

I'm trying out a new word, to see if I like it. "Illustration" can mean a
graphic or text. So I will use "Illustration" to refer to the file object
which has the content that will be linked to a person or Tag.

One of my biggest hopes for a "Master Illustration List" is that it would
allow and encourage the file object to be stored only once. This can be done
now. However, it would *also* allow and encourage that all data that is
specific to the file object would be stored with it, and only with it. Only
data that is specific to the link would be stored with the link.

The design should be well structured even though it is understood that TMG
users will violate that design at the drop of a hat - often quite
creatively.

Darrell

----------------------------
NEW MATERIAL BEGINS

Hi, Teresa:

Unequivocally no, on two counts. The "Master Illustration List" would have
records that exist in a strict one to one relationship with the file object
(or the equivalent stored in the TMG data). The entire point of a "Master
Illustration List" (and since I invented the term I am the expert [grin]) is
to ***AVOID*** multiple copies of the file object, *both* in the sense of
data files *and* in the sense of records in the MIL. Said another way; the
"Master Illustration List" would not even *permit* the same file object (as
defined by the file path and file name, or the TMG data) to be used twice.
Otherwise the "MIL" is not the "MIL", it is something else. (Note: I
recognize that some users would busy themselves creating duplicates of file
objects, with different names, so they could cram everything into the MIL.
That would waste most of the benefit of *having* an MIL, but I'm sure they
wouldn't be stopped -- nor would they need to be.)

Similarly, since one Illustration, or file object, can be used with
different Captions, it would be wrong to store the Captions in the MIL
record. That approach confuses data about the Illustration, with data about
the link. The data in the MIL would be limited to that which would not
change regardless of links to a person or Tag. The Caption might change from
link to link -- and often would. Therefore it does not belong in the MIL
(Note: this does not negate the usefulness of a *default* Caption that could
be overridden "locally" if the user wished.)

The equivalent error in the Source system would be to necessitate a
different Source only because you want a different Citation Detail. You can
bend the design to do that, if you want, but the design should not
accomodate that type of usage directly. It limits the benefit of a true
Master List to others. (Similarly, if your Source entries for the census
differ only in what the design anticipates will be put into Citation Detail
fields, then you are likewise, to that extent, losing the benefit of having
a Master List. But since the design doesn't require the rest of us to do the
same, there is no harm done.)

Darrell



Darrell A. Martin
a native Vermonter in exile in Illinois



==== TMG Mailing List ====
Send all messages and replies to <>.




This thread: