I suspect the confusion is with the generalisation you included : #COMMENT(2) entry reads <alternative> for <field> Where <alternative> is the alternative from the record and <field> is the field in the record, either surname, given name, mother's name, spouse name, district, volume of page number. Note that there is no space between "#COMMENT" and the "(2)". The <alternative> suggests that only one of the alternative names is entered in the comment, i.e. the name other than the one entered in the record to which the comment applies. This appears to be confirmed by 'the alternative from the record' definition of <alternative>. Derk Lowe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> To: <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 1:59 PM Subject: Re: Tip of the Day (No. 6) (last updated 01 April 2012) (subject was- Message Posted on behalf of BillP) > Bill > > Thanks for the query, however my information is correct and isn't > conflicting advice. > > I'll see if I can clear up any misunderstanding. > > #COMMENT(2) means the comment applies to the entry above the #COMMENT line > plus the entry which follows it. > > If you were to enter #COMMENT(2) entry reads Bradley for mother's name it > wouldn't really make sense if I can illustrate this by the example I gave > earlier in my Tip. > > My actual advice was: > > Dunn,Charles,Curphey,W.Derby,8b,697 > #COMMENT(2) entry reads Curphey or Bradley for mother`s name > Dunn,Charles,Bradley,W.Derby,8b,697 > > Your interpretation is: > > Dunn,Charles,Curphey,W.Derby,8b,697 > > #COMMENT(2) entry reads Bradley for mother's name > Dunn,Charles,Bradley,W.Derby,8b,697 > > This means you are saying the entry in the index reads Bradley for the > mother's name. However in actual fact the entry in the index reads Curphey > or Bradley which is what my #COMMENT(2) says. > > You interpretation also means that you are saying for the line showing as: > > Dunn,Charles,Bradley,W.Derby,8b,697 that the entry reads Bradley for the > mother's name. Why would you need say the entry reads Bradley if that is > what you have transcribed? > > What I don't quite understand is that in your file 1959B1B0181 which you > uploaded to FreeBMD on 23 September 2011 you correctly interpreted the use > of the #COMMENT(2) line, the following is from your file: > > Burt,Peter R.,Close,Yeovil,7c,450 > #COMMENT(2) entry reads Close or Burt for Mother > Burt,Peter R.,Burt,Yeovil,7c,450 > > Please search FreeBMD for Burt,Peter in Births 1959 March you will see the > effect of your correctly inserted #COMMENT(2) line? > > You continued the correct approach to the #COMMENT(2) line up until your > file 1959B1H0093 which was uploaded on 28 October 2011. Then for some > reason for the subsequent files 1959B1H0094 etc you changed to using > > Harris,James J.,Harris,Surrey S.W.,5g,1271 > #COMMENT(2) entry reads Matthews for mothers name > Harris,James J.,Matthews,Surrey S.W.,5g,1271 > > Now please search FreeBMD for Harris,James in Births 1959 March you will > see the effect of your incorrectly inserted #COMMENT(2) line? > > Hope this help with your query? > > Regards > > Allan Raymond > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
If the information in our Transcribers' Knowledge Base is unclear hence leading to different interpretations and confusion then there is no problem in me putting a task on the system to have it amended. We do however give an example of the format for the #COMMENT line i.e. #COMMENT(2) entry reads BONUS alias CHAPMAN for surname I'm still wondering what led Bill to change his approach from entering initially #COMMENT(2) entry reads BONUS alias CHAPMAN for surname to later on entering #COMMENT(2) entry reads BONUS for surname? Allan Raymond From: D LOWE <derek_lowe@btinternet.com> >To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com >Sent: Thursday, 5 April 2012, 14:41 >Subject: Re: Tip of the Day (No. 6) (last updated 01 April 2012) (subject was- Message Posted on behalf of BillP) > >I suspect the confusion is with the generalisation you included : > >#COMMENT(2) entry reads <alternative> for <field> Where <alternative> is the > alternative from the record and <field> is the field in the record, either > surname, given name, mother's name, spouse name, district, volume of page > number. Note that there is no space between "#COMMENT" and the "(2)". > >The <alternative> suggests that only one of the alternative names is entered >in the comment, i.e. the name other than the one entered in the record to >which the comment applies. This appears to be confirmed by 'the alternative >from the record' definition of <alternative>. > >Derk Lowe > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> >To: <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2012 1:59 PM >Subject: Re: Tip of the Day (No. 6) (last updated 01 April 2012) (subject >was- Message Posted on behalf of BillP) > > >> Bill >> >> Thanks for the query, however my information is correct and isn't >> conflicting advice. >> >> I'll see if I can clear up any misunderstanding. >> >> #COMMENT(2) means the comment applies to the entry above the #COMMENT line >> plus the entry which follows it. >> >> If you were to enter #COMMENT(2) entry reads Bradley for mother's name it >> wouldn't really make sense if I can illustrate this by the example I gave >> earlier in my Tip. >> >> My actual advice was: >> >> Dunn,Charles,Curphey,W.Derby,8b,697 >> #COMMENT(2) entry reads Curphey or Bradley for mother`s name >> Dunn,Charles,Bradley,W.Derby,8b,697 >> >> Your interpretation is: >> >> Dunn,Charles,Curphey,W.Derby,8b,697 >> >> #COMMENT(2) entry reads Bradley for mother's name >> Dunn,Charles,Bradley,W.Derby,8b,697 >> >> This means you are saying the entry in the index reads Bradley for the >> mother's name. However in actual fact the entry in the index reads Curphey >> or Bradley which is what my #COMMENT(2) says. >> >> You interpretation also means that you are saying for the line showing as: >> >> Dunn,Charles,Bradley,W.Derby,8b,697 that the entry reads Bradley for the >> mother's name. Why would you need say the entry reads Bradley if that is >> what you have transcribed? >> >> What I don't quite understand is that in your file 1959B1B0181 which you >> uploaded to FreeBMD on 23 September 2011 you correctly interpreted the use >> of the #COMMENT(2) line, the following is from your file: >> >> Burt,Peter R.,Close,Yeovil,7c,450 >> #COMMENT(2) entry reads Close or Burt for Mother >> Burt,Peter R.,Burt,Yeovil,7c,450 >> >> Please search FreeBMD for Burt,Peter in Births 1959 March you will see the >> effect of your correctly inserted #COMMENT(2) line? >> >> You continued the correct approach to the #COMMENT(2) line up until your >> file 1959B1H0093 which was uploaded on 28 October 2011. Then for some >> reason for the subsequent files 1959B1H0094 etc you changed to using >> >> Harris,James J.,Harris,Surrey S.W.,5g,1271 >> #COMMENT(2) entry reads Matthews for mothers name >> Harris,James J.,Matthews,Surrey S.W.,5g,1271 >> >> Now please search FreeBMD for Harris,James in Births 1959 March you will >> see the effect of your incorrectly inserted #COMMENT(2) line? >> >> Hope this help with your query? >> >> Regards >> >> Allan Raymond >