In a message dated 24/04/2005 10:05:15 GMT Standard Time, FreeBMD-Admins-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: > B_(ce)ulford should be written as B_[ce]ulford Have I been doing something wrong? Although I always use square brackets, I have never actually used an underscore to indicate where the letter should be, I just type the letters/numbers in the square brackets. I thought an underscore was only used with the { } type of bracket. Lesley

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 04:18:27 EDT, you wrote: >In a message dated 24/04/2005 10:05:15 GMT Standard Time, >FreeBMD-Admins-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: > >> B_(ce)ulford should be written as B_[ce]ulford > > >Have I been doing something wrong? Although I always use square brackets, I >have never actually used an underscore to indicate where the letter should be, >I just type the letters/numbers in the square brackets. I thought an >underscore was only used with the { } type of bracket. _ can be used with any type of bracket. B_[ce]ulford means that there are two letters between the "B" and "u" and that the second of those two letters is either "c" or "e" B_(ce)ulford is totally ambiguous. It *could* mean exactly the same thing. It could mean (for example) that there is a single missing letter which is either "c" or "e". The problem is that by not using the proper uncertain character format, the transcriber has left us uncertain as to what is meant. B_[c_]ulford would be a perfectly valid transcription. It says that the second missing letter might be a "c", but the transcriber isn't certain. -- Dave Mayall