Peter Hendy-Ibbs wrote: > Some of the One-namers are selective, that is they only research a > surname for a particular region (I am guilty here because I do not > record the Stoke-on-Trent Ibbs names), so the names are not true > sequences. Others include related surnames (i.e. related by marriage) > within the same file, so I may have a long sequence of Dutton (for > instance), some random Trewicks, and a small sequence of Goths where > someone has been looking for a specific event. It is impossible for me > to be sure that sequences are complete, and difficult at a practical > level, to search and insert so many +BREAKs. The only files where that > may be achieved is in the few larger files where a contributor has > transcribed every instance of a name - and then I would have to insert > approximately 250 +BREAKs between 1837 and 1900 (and some files go to > 1983)! +BREAK is NOT needed on change of quarter. > I can't change them to Random if they have sequences, and I can't tell > where the BREAKs should be. Rainman meets Catch22? It would seem so :-( We need to deal with these files on a case by case basis. -- Dave Mayall