Hi Dave: I don't, as far as I am aware, have any files containing "unknown" death entries. Nevertheless, I am compelled to comment on this situation of the pre-1866 files. I believe that the position in the record of the death entry is well defined. That being so, all entries containing incorrect data can be fixed programmatically. If this can be done with a reasonable effort, I do not understand why volunteers are required to fix entries individually by hand. Apart from the amount of time involved, it is certain that additional errors will be introduced during the correction process itself. I would not be surprised to hear that volunteers decline to make these corrections and this would be a real loss to the freeBMD project. Can you or someone you know come up with a satisfactory solution? Regards, Peter Adams The MacPack On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Dave Mayall wrote: > On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:26:47 -0000, you wrote: > > >You wrote: > >Hi > > > >A list of volunteers with Red warning files can be found on my Web Page at: > > > >http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/FreeBMD_Errorfiles.htm . > > > >I'm still working on some of the information. > > > >Could I please ask Co-ordinators to liase with their volunteers to correct > >the errant files? > > > > > >Regards > > > >Allan Raymond > > > >Hi, > >May I respectfully ask what is to be gained by altering 39 files in my case, > >I noticed another at 50, all done before Winbmd was altered to cope with no > >age at death. Adding a '?' > > or '*' was the option open to us at the time. Of course we will alter them > >if really necessary but they have lasted all this time, and I thought, > >perhaps wrongly, that we did not ask people to go back on matters of this > >kind. > > To the best of my knowledge, there was NEVER any official advice > offered to use "?" or "*" (or indeed "_" or "-") in this field. > > This is why we always suggest that if people encounter a difficult > situation, they should ask for advice, and NOT just come up with > something that seems to work OK. > > As to asking people to go back. The convention is that where we change > the rules, we don't ask people to go back. Where the rules have always > been the same, but the software didn't check quite strictly enough, we > will ask people to go back. > > -- > Dave Mayall > > > ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== > For those in -L mode, to unsubscribe from this mailing list please send the command UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message to - > [email protected] > > ============================== > OneWorldTree - The World's largest family tree. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13971/rd.ashx > >

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:56:33 -0500 (EST), you wrote: >Hi Dave: > >I don't, as far as I am aware, have any files containing "unknown" death >entries. Nevertheless, I am compelled to comment on this situation of the >pre-1866 files. >I believe that the position in the record of the death entry is well >defined. That being so, all entries containing incorrect data can be fixed >programmatically. That assumes that the error can be identified! The program identifies an error condition, namely the presence of AaD on a pre-1866 death record. It cannot identify what the correct course of action is. The simplistic view is that the AaD should be removed from these files, but that ignores the other option that the date header is wrong. This may be a less common cause, but it will be the case for some files >Apart from the amount of time involved, it is certain that additional >errors will be introduced during the correction process itself. I would >not be surprised to hear that volunteers decline to make these corrections >and this would be a real loss to the freeBMD project. So, there is an error, and we should guess what the fix is, because people may refuse to put their files right. >Can you or someone you know come up with a satisfactory solution? No. I can come up with a number of solutions which are unsatisfactory from the point of view of getting the best quality data, but I suspect I'll run a white flag up the mast, because it seems that expedience is more important than quality. -- Dave Mayall