On Mon, 19 Aug 2013 00:03:48 +0200, Richard van Schaik <f.m.a.vanschaikREMOVE@THISgmail.com> wrote: >On 18-08-2013 23:52, Charles Ellson wrote: >> On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 17:05:21 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" >> <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> [] >>>> Births Jun 1891 >>>> Martin James Elias Gravesend 2a 538 >>> [] >>> (Deliberately deleted poster details as this isn't specific to that >>> poster.) >>> >>> I presume from the "2a 538" that this is from a BMD index. >>> >>> I'm sure most of us here know this, but it will mislead newcomers to the >>> hobby: these indexes are divided into quarter years, so the above really >>> means "April, May, or June 1891" (plus see last paragraph below). >>> >>> Unfortunately, I have seen such referred to as both "Apr 1891" and "Jun >>> 1891", so there isn't any consistency. >>> >>> Can we as a hobby/profession start to abandon using only a month to >>> refer to a quarter, when further precision isn't known? I'd suggest any >>> of >>> >> >>> Apr-Jun 1891 >>> 1891, Apr-Jun >>> Q2 1891 >>> 1891Q2 >>> >>> (with my personal preference being for the last one). >>> >>> It'll be a long haul, not least because both Ancestry and FreeBMD use >>> this form in _some_ of their output (I'm not sure whether FMP do). >>> >>> [Ancestry have even mangled it further: they've _tried_ to fix it, but >>> then let it pass through another interpreter stage that turned "1" into >>> "Jan", so I've sometimes seen "QJan-Jan-Feb-Mar" (or something very like >>> that) in Ancestry output.] >>> >>> >>> What does the house think (about the suggestion we try to stop using >>> just one month to indicate a quarter)? >>> >> It has been standard to refer to MAR, JUN, SEP, DEC quarters since >> 1837. > >And when I fill Jan - Mar in in my database it gives in representation >only the first month to my regret. For me clear as local database with >full data for outsiders via site confusing. > A bit of quick Googling suggests that working in quarters is not something that all databases are born with although it does get a mention in my ancient copy of Lotus 123.