Thank you Ian As the Co-ordinator that has just been allocated 1937 Births - and lost no time in pointing out the potential problem, I should be pleased to trial the programme for you. I would expect to start allocations to transcribers in a few weeks time but may well transcribe the odd page myself before that to see where any potential pitfalls are. Kind Regards Jeremy Hakes All Scan Syndicate -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ian Brooke Sent: 15 February 2009 22:22 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD The only quick fix would be for me to send a version of the WinBMD program which allows numbers to the coordinator and let him/her give it to the transcribers, they could just save it into their WinBMD folder. The longer this program is used, the more I find that some of the checks that the program is doing are no longer valid . I'm not sure if this is because they have changed with time or if I was simply too rigorous. They were or at least seemed a good idea at the time, even though they duplicate checks that the FreeBMD upload carries out, it seemed better that the transcriber finds errors before trying to upload. I don't really know what the best long-term answer is - to remove them altogether or try to bring them back in line with FreeBMD or something else. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 2:16 PM Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD > In addition to keeping the WinBMD standard District Picklist up to > date > how are we going to deal with Districts such as "Northumberland North > First" which came into being on 1 January 1937. > > I'm now starting to allocate 1937 to Syndicates and scans are showing > "Northumberland North First" as "Nthhmbld.N.1st". WinBMD doesn't accept > numerals in the District Field and it isn't really on to expect > transcribers to adopt the process in > http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6ah which really was to cover a > possible mistype in the District name? > > Allan Raymond > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Archer Barrie" <Barrie.Archer@uk.fujitsu.com> > To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com>; > <freebmd-scratchpad@mailman.aldigital.co.uk> > Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 7:34 AM > Subject: Revised district lists for WinBMD > > > I am discussing with Ian Brooke how the next version of WinBMD can be > enhanced to address the problem of the district list getting out of > date. > > The issue is that the District Aliasing Team are continually revising > the district information on the system but transcribers using WinBMD > are working with an out of date version of this information. The > current proposal is that when WinBMD uploads a file to the system it > will also download a new version of the district file if one exists. > This means that subsequently the transcriber will be working with the > new districts list. > > The transcriber's locally added districts will not be affected by > downloading the new districts list. > > If anyone can see any issues with this, or would like clarification of > the proposal, please let me know. > > Barrie > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1953 - Release Date: 02/14/09 18:01:00

Hi Jeremy, Changing the program should only take a couple of days. I'd like to wait and see if Barrie has any ideas for the best way forward, drop me another line if we are getting too close for comfort. Regards Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy Hakes" <jeremy.hakes@talktalk.net> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 4:25 PM Subject: RE: Revised district lists for WinBMD > Thank you Ian > > As the Co-ordinator that has just been allocated 1937 Births - and lost no > time in pointing out the potential problem, I should be pleased to trial > the > programme for you. > > I would expect to start allocations to transcribers in a few weeks time > but > may well transcribe the odd page myself before that to see where any > potential pitfalls are. > > Kind Regards > Jeremy Hakes > All Scan Syndicate > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ian Brooke > Sent: 15 February 2009 22:22 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD > > > The only quick fix would be for me to send a version of the WinBMD program > which allows numbers to the coordinator and let him/her give it to the > transcribers, they could just save it into their WinBMD folder. > > The longer this program is used, the more I find that some of the checks > that the program is doing are no longer valid . I'm not sure if this is > because they have changed with time or if I was simply too rigorous. They > were or at least seemed a good idea at the time, even though they > duplicate > checks that the FreeBMD upload carries out, it seemed better that the > transcriber finds errors before trying to upload. I don't really know > what > the best long-term answer is - to remove them altogether or try to bring > them back in line with FreeBMD or something else. Does anyone have any > thoughts on this? > > Ian > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> > To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 2:16 PM > Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD > > >> In addition to keeping the WinBMD standard District Picklist up to >> date >> how are we going to deal with Districts such as "Northumberland North >> First" which came into being on 1 January 1937. >> >> I'm now starting to allocate 1937 to Syndicates and scans are showing >> "Northumberland North First" as "Nthhmbld.N.1st". WinBMD doesn't accept >> numerals in the District Field and it isn't really on to expect >> transcribers to adopt the process in >> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6ah which really was to cover a >> possible mistype in the District name? >> >> Allan Raymond >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Archer Barrie" <Barrie.Archer@uk.fujitsu.com> >> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com>; >> <freebmd-scratchpad@mailman.aldigital.co.uk> >> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 7:34 AM >> Subject: Revised district lists for WinBMD >> >> >> I am discussing with Ian Brooke how the next version of WinBMD can be >> enhanced to address the problem of the district list getting out of >> date. >> >> The issue is that the District Aliasing Team are continually revising >> the district information on the system but transcribers using WinBMD >> are working with an out of date version of this information. The >> current proposal is that when WinBMD uploads a file to the system it >> will also download a new version of the district file if one exists. >> This means that subsequently the transcriber will be working with the >> new districts list. >> >> The transcriber's locally added districts will not be affected by >> downloading the new districts list. >> >> If anyone can see any issues with this, or would like clarification of >> the proposal, please let me know. >> >> Barrie >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1953 - Release Date: 02/14/09 > 18:01:00 > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi Jeremy, Further to my earlier reply, I perhaps should have explained fully. A version of WinBMD that allows numbers in District names already exists, that version should indeed allow any character in a district name that FreeBMD allows, unless that has changed recently! There is however a small complication in entering numbers although in practice this seems unlikely to affect anyone. The problem is that typing a number will be interpreted as a picklist selection and will in all cases enter the appropraite picklist entry and move to the next column. However, in the (limited) examples I have seen, by the time the number is typed there will be no matching picklist entries and so WinBMD will simply enter the number without complaint. In the event that there is a matching picklist entry it is necessary to type something (for example a z) to ensure there are no matches, type the number, then go back and delete the z. I know it's messy but I cannot think of an alternative, and as I said, it seems very unlikely it will happen in practice. Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy Hakes" <jeremy.hakes@talktalk.net> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 4:25 PM Subject: RE: Revised district lists for WinBMD > Thank you Ian > > As the Co-ordinator that has just been allocated 1937 Births - and lost no > time in pointing out the potential problem, I should be pleased to trial > the > programme for you. > > I would expect to start allocations to transcribers in a few weeks time > but > may well transcribe the odd page myself before that to see where any > potential pitfalls are. > > Kind Regards > Jeremy Hakes > All Scan Syndicate > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ian Brooke > Sent: 15 February 2009 22:22 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD > > > The only quick fix would be for me to send a version of the WinBMD program > which allows numbers to the coordinator and let him/her give it to the > transcribers, they could just save it into their WinBMD folder. > > The longer this program is used, the more I find that some of the checks > that the program is doing are no longer valid . I'm not sure if this is > because they have changed with time or if I was simply too rigorous. They > were or at least seemed a good idea at the time, even though they > duplicate > checks that the FreeBMD upload carries out, it seemed better that the > transcriber finds errors before trying to upload. I don't really know > what > the best long-term answer is - to remove them altogether or try to bring > them back in line with FreeBMD or something else. Does anyone have any > thoughts on this? > > Ian > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> > To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 2:16 PM > Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD > > >> In addition to keeping the WinBMD standard District Picklist up to >> date >> how are we going to deal with Districts such as "Northumberland North >> First" which came into being on 1 January 1937. >> >> I'm now starting to allocate 1937 to Syndicates and scans are showing >> "Northumberland North First" as "Nthhmbld.N.1st". WinBMD doesn't accept >> numerals in the District Field and it isn't really on to expect >> transcribers to adopt the process in >> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6ah which really was to cover a >> possible mistype in the District name? >> >> Allan Raymond >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Archer Barrie" <Barrie.Archer@uk.fujitsu.com> >> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com>; >> <freebmd-scratchpad@mailman.aldigital.co.uk> >> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 7:34 AM >> Subject: Revised district lists for WinBMD >> >> >> I am discussing with Ian Brooke how the next version of WinBMD can be >> enhanced to address the problem of the district list getting out of >> date. >> >> The issue is that the District Aliasing Team are continually revising >> the district information on the system but transcribers using WinBMD >> are working with an out of date version of this information. The >> current proposal is that when WinBMD uploads a file to the system it >> will also download a new version of the district file if one exists. >> This means that subsequently the transcriber will be working with the >> new districts list. >> >> The transcriber's locally added districts will not be affected by >> downloading the new districts list. >> >> If anyone can see any issues with this, or would like clarification of >> the proposal, please let me know. >> >> Barrie >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1953 - Release Date: 02/14/09 > 18:01:00 > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi Ian A further thought, and putting on my District Aliasing hat: It is only the abreviated forms of Northumberland North First and Second that contain numbers "officially" - both still exist, so perhaps numbers 3 to 9 and 0 could still be restricted? It also seems to me that the numbers 1 and 2 would normally be preceded by either an "N" or "h" or a full stop or space. Does this help to restrict choices? There may be another problem. My email system (Outlook) blocks all "exe" files to and from me. I normally have to rename them as ex_ bedore sending. Could this be made available as a download on a website? Regards Jeremy -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ian Brooke Sent: 16 February 2009 05:44 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD Hi Jeremy, Further to my earlier reply, I perhaps should have explained fully. A version of WinBMD that allows numbers in District names already exists, that version should indeed allow any character in a district name that FreeBMD allows, unless that has changed recently! There is however a small complication in entering numbers although in practice this seems unlikely to affect anyone. The problem is that typing a number will be interpreted as a picklist selection and will in all cases enter the appropraite picklist entry and move to the next column. However, in the (limited) examples I have seen, by the time the number is typed there will be no matching picklist entries and so WinBMD will simply enter the number without complaint. In the event that there is a matching picklist entry it is necessary to type something (for example a z) to ensure there are no matches, type the number, then go back and delete the z. I know it's messy but I cannot think of an alternative, and as I said, it seems very unlikely it will happen in practice. Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeremy Hakes" <jeremy.hakes@talktalk.net> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 4:25 PM Subject: RE: Revised district lists for WinBMD > Thank you Ian > > As the Co-ordinator that has just been allocated 1937 Births - and lost no > time in pointing out the potential problem, I should be pleased to trial > the > programme for you. > > I would expect to start allocations to transcribers in a few weeks time > but > may well transcribe the odd page myself before that to see where any > potential pitfalls are. > > Kind Regards > Jeremy Hakes > All Scan Syndicate > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ian Brooke > Sent: 15 February 2009 22:22 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD > > > The only quick fix would be for me to send a version of the WinBMD program > which allows numbers to the coordinator and let him/her give it to the > transcribers, they could just save it into their WinBMD folder. > > The longer this program is used, the more I find that some of the checks > that the program is doing are no longer valid . I'm not sure if this is > because they have changed with time or if I was simply too rigorous. They > were or at least seemed a good idea at the time, even though they > duplicate > checks that the FreeBMD upload carries out, it seemed better that the > transcriber finds errors before trying to upload. I don't really know > what > the best long-term answer is - to remove them altogether or try to bring > them back in line with FreeBMD or something else. Does anyone have any > thoughts on this? > > Ian > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> > To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 2:16 PM > Subject: Re: Revised district lists for WinBMD > > >> In addition to keeping the WinBMD standard District Picklist up to >> date >> how are we going to deal with Districts such as "Northumberland North >> First" which came into being on 1 January 1937. >> >> I'm now starting to allocate 1937 to Syndicates and scans are showing >> "Northumberland North First" as "Nthhmbld.N.1st". WinBMD doesn't accept >> numerals in the District Field and it isn't really on to expect >> transcribers to adopt the process in >> http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6ah which really was to cover a >> possible mistype in the District name? >> >> Allan Raymond >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Archer Barrie" <Barrie.Archer@uk.fujitsu.com> >> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com>; >> <freebmd-scratchpad@mailman.aldigital.co.uk> >> Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2009 7:34 AM >> Subject: Revised district lists for WinBMD >> >> >> I am discussing with Ian Brooke how the next version of WinBMD can be >> enhanced to address the problem of the district list getting out of >> date. >> >> The issue is that the District Aliasing Team are continually revising >> the district information on the system but transcribers using WinBMD >> are working with an out of date version of this information. The >> current proposal is that when WinBMD uploads a file to the system it >> will also download a new version of the district file if one exists. >> This means that subsequently the transcriber will be working with the >> new districts list. >> >> The transcriber's locally added districts will not be affected by >> downloading the new districts list. >> >> If anyone can see any issues with this, or would like clarification of >> the proposal, please let me know. >> >> Barrie >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1953 - Release Date: 02/14/09 > 18:01:00 > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1953 - Release Date: 02/14/09 18:01:00