Hi Garry, As Dave is not around at the mo .. here is his answer from a few days ago on this list ... Dave Mayall said: > > 1) There are cases where there is quite distinctly a period following a forename, > > separate from and different to the row of dots that follow. > > 2) The use of such a period would appear to be against some but not all records > > on a page > > 3) we can conclude that either it means something or is poor typesetting > > > > We know that a period following a single letter means that the letter is a > > contraction of a name to an initial, so I propose a hypothesis that a period > > following a forename MAY indicate that there are further forenames not indexed > > > > Now, if my hypothesis is bunkum, we can easily tell the program at some future > > date to ignore the periods. If my hypothesis is correct, and we decide as a matter > > of policy to omit the periods, we cannot go back and have the program insert the > > periods. We will have lost data. > > > > That explains why it isn't correct to omit the period. > > > > The question that we are trying to resolve is not whether it is right to lose this > > data (it isn't), but whether it is realistic to try and capture it, or whether we > > will lose so much of it through transcribers being unable to see the character, through > > deliberate omission by transcribers who decline to follow policy, or through transcribers > > who omit it without even considering that it may have data value, that we are wasting our > > time. Kiwiz Syndicate wrote: > > >The full stop *is* potentially valuable data. > > I cant' see any possible way a fullstop could be 'potentially valuable data' > after a F'name, the decision seems somewhat pedantic to me . Please clarify > 'potentially valuable' for me please. I understand that some people may find it pedanitc, but it is for a reason. We believe that it might indictae a shortened name for example and it may be a clue to the person reading the record. We should give people as much info as we can .. Hope that helps Cheers Graham > > Garry > KIWIZ Syndicate Co-ordinator > > ============================== > Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp

| Dave Mayall said: | > > 1) There are cases where there is quite distinctly a period following a forename, | > > separate from and different to the row of dots that follow. | > > 2) The use of such a period would appear to be against some but not all records | > > on a page | > > 3) we can conclude that either it means something or is poor typesetting | > > | > > We know that a period following a single letter means that the letter is a | > > contraction of a name to an initial, so I propose a hypothesis that a period | > > following a forename MAY indicate that there are further forenames not indexed snip I don't know which page Dave is on about but I have checked out a number of typed pages here; http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/GUS/1868/Marriages/March/DB-01 1868M1-0007.tif 1868M1-0008.tif 1868M1-0009.tif The fullstop/period denotes the end of something not the opposite. My dictionary says 'Complete cessation'. IMHO the period signifies the end of the forenames, NOT the possible continuance of. Notice they use a comma after a surname MEANING more follows. - Contrary to 2) above: There is a period at the end of EVERY Forename on each page above and if it's not there it's been obliterated. - If there are two forenames the period is only entered after the second name. - Some names have three F'names ie Mary Ann B., the period is at the end (this period must be entered as it's an abbrev.). - I tried to find a 4+ F'name example but could not. But I assume they would write it Mary Ann B C. Maybe someone could give us an example of a name longer than 3 F'names. | Dave Mayall said | > Now, if my hypothesis is bunkum...snip It's worse than bunkum, I think it's a load of hot smelly air to be honest, Dave!. And we're all downwind :-). Logic/common sense has to prevail here at sometime, I'm sure. THE PERIOD is there to say THE END...... and is NOT 'potentially valuable data'. What say you?. Garry KIWIZ Syndicate Co-ordinator