Mervyn, Thankyou for clarifying this whole topic regarding full stops. I'm sure other transcribers were not aware of the differences, as outlined below. I will now endeavor to transcribe the CORRECT entries based on what you have told us. Cheers, Andrew -----Original Message----- From: Mervyn Wright [mailto:mervyn.wright@talk21.com] Sent: 06 September 2003 15:03 To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: fullstops. I for one am getting totally ........ off with this continuous and recurring discussion on the subject of FULL STOPS, and so, I am sure, are the leaders of this project. Dave Mayall has set out, concisely and cogently, the reason why we transcribe full stops in Christian names. If we could all now get on with transcribing and stop bickering, then perhaps the project will get completed. Just to re-iterate for those who may have missed it and are transcribing from typed source, the following applies - Smith John.......Aston,6d 999 Smith John J.....Aston,6d 999 These assume NO full stop and none should be transcribed Smith John. .....Aston,6d 999 Smith John J. ...Aston,6d 999 These assume full stop and should be transcribed. Regards Mervyn Wright -----Original Message----- From: Steve Gaunt [mailto:steve@email.hinet.hr] Sent: 06 September 2003 12:03 To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: re: fullstops. The only reasons for putting the fullstops as far as I know are: 1. Something to do with consistancy in transcribing and the software at FreeBMD and double keying. 2. A promise to transcribe the data as is. If the software is based an the accurate transcription of every fullstop, comma, etc, then there is the need to transcribe as is, though I am told that double keying would involve different source, which may not even carry the full stop, though I may have that wrong (David, refresh my memory) Other than the two reasons stated above, there is no reason at all to transcribe full stops. The original handwritten scans didn't carry them; they were put there in later versions. So: perhaps the software can be "rewired" so that full stops have no significance? Then it wouldn't matter if they were transcribed or not. As for the second reason, I doubt if whoever the promise was made to would care in the slightest about full stops. Perhaps they should be approached? We have already broken from the promise to reproduce as is by the insertion of surnames where duplicate surnames are indicated by a line. Perhaps also the software can be "rewired" so that full stops have no significance? Then it wouldn't matter if they were transcribed or not. It would also stop these discussions popping up every six month or so. Steve Gaunt ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 19/08/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 19/08/2003 ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237