I think it is down to what is appropriate for each person. How you standardise this I have no idea. My children were 'Christened' when they were babies in a Church of England church. As a generalisation I would say that most Christenings whereas other denominations, Methodist, Baptist, etc. use the word Baptism. My sister-in-law, who was also Christened Church of England as a baby, then joined the Pentecostal church and she was then 'baptised' as an adult. Jackie Cotterill -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 15 January 2014 08:01 To: [email protected] Subject: FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS Digest, Vol 9, Issue 18 Today's Topics: 1. Re: Christenings vs baptism (Rod Moulding) 2. Re: Christenings vs baptism (Tony Proctor) 3. Re: Christenings vs baptism (DaveT) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:09:30 -0000 From: "Rod Moulding" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FHU] Christenings vs baptism To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original This looks to me like a matter for the Family History Information Standards Organisation (FHISO), whose mission is to devise, and to secure the acceptance and adoption of, a better GEDCOM, and whose Founder Members include Calico Pie. Simon - is FHISO making any progress? Rod Moulding -----Original Message----- From: Adrian Bruce Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2014 5:09 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [FHU] Christenings vs baptism <<snipped>> Gedcom is supposed to be precise. <<snipped>> Personally, I would suggest that this is somewhat unfair given that real life is not precise and GEDCOM tries to describe it. There is a degree of flexibility intended in GEDCOM - and a degree of flexibility that has crept in by common practice, regardless of the standard. For instance, the GEDCOM definition of a PLACE is a "**jurisdictional** name to identify the place or location of an event" (my emphasis). Anyone restrict their placenames to jurisdictions? i.e. to placenames representing only local government entities, church townships / parishes, etc.? I think some Americans do restrict themselves thus, but UK genealogists? <<snipped>> What happens outside Christian practice may require a different terminology. <<snipped>> Absolutely so. But I would also suggest that *if* you regard the creation of a custom fact as impossibly forbidding (or as a hostage to fortune if you do transfer your data) then you might care to use CHR for a naming event in another religion, because that's what the definition says. Yes, I recognise that will be an utterly unacceptable usage for some, but my point is that IF you care to use it, there is a degree of intended and accidental flexibility in GEDCOM that is very useful, and increasing precision will result in either loss of ability to input stuff or need a massive increase in the number of items in use. And I can name some of you who are frowning at my advocacy of such flexibility by this point! Adrian B ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:50:53 -0000 From: "Tony Proctor" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FHU] Christenings vs baptism To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Recent pronouncement from Drew Smith on this subject: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.genealogy.computing/A3Bksk8dpUA/wIrL8ZQd pLAJ Tony Proctor ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rod Moulding" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 11:09 AM Subject: Re: [FHU] Christenings vs baptism > This looks to me like a matter for the Family History Information > Standards > Organisation (FHISO), whose mission is to devise, and to secure the > acceptance and adoption of, a better GEDCOM, and whose Founder Members > include Calico Pie. Simon - is FHISO making any progress? > > Rod Moulding > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adrian Bruce > Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2014 5:09 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [FHU] Christenings vs baptism > > <<snipped>> > Gedcom is supposed to be precise. > <<snipped>> > > Personally, I would suggest that this is somewhat unfair given that real > life is not precise and GEDCOM tries to describe it. There is a degree of > flexibility intended in GEDCOM - and a degree of flexibility that has > crept > in by common practice, regardless of the standard. > > For instance, the GEDCOM definition of a PLACE is a "**jurisdictional** > name > to identify the place or location of an event" (my emphasis). Anyone > restrict their placenames to jurisdictions? i.e. to placenames > representing > only local government entities, church townships / parishes, etc.? I think > some Americans do restrict themselves thus, but UK genealogists? > > <<snipped>> > What happens outside Christian practice may require a different > terminology. > <<snipped>> > > Absolutely so. But I would also suggest that *if* you regard the creation > of > a custom fact as impossibly forbidding (or as a hostage to fortune if you > do > transfer your data) then you might care to use CHR for a naming event in > another religion, because that's what the definition says. Yes, I > recognise > that will be an utterly unacceptable usage for some, but my point is that > IF > you care to use it, there is a degree of intended and accidental > flexibility > in GEDCOM that is very useful, and increasing precision will result in > either loss of ability to input stuff or need a massive increase in the > number of items in use. > > And I can name some of you who are frowning at my advocacy of such > flexibility by this point! > > Adrian B > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:10:50 -0000 From: "DaveT" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FHU] Christenings vs baptism To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message: 5 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 15:47:13 -0000 From: "John Lockley" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FHU] Christenings vs baptism To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Yes, I have agreed with Adrian before that custom events are a great help. However, they will inevitably be "each to his own" and this makes cross-fertilization between different gedcom files problematic to say the least. I'd prefer standardization. I suppose, though, that "each to his own" would make it a brave soul who dared to define an improved standard. ********** I don't have the problem of non-Christian families (just atheist, agnostics and heathens!) but I surmise that most of the major religions/belief systems have a ceremony for naming and introducing new born children to the community. Can anyone provide a list? I would not expect this list to be definitive. But from a list, if anyone has defined their own custom event they could publish it, here at least, and thus begin the process of creating a standard. If I had this problem I would want to publish MY definition to see what the experts in that religion (etc.) thought and which of my fields they thought were inappropriate or missing. DaveT In Sunny South Yorkshire ------------------------------ To contact the FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS list administrator, send an email to [email protected] To post a message to the FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS mailing list, send an email to [email protected] __________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body of the email with no additional text. End of FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS Digest, Vol 9, Issue 18 ***************************************************** --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com