"Wes Groleau" <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote in message news:TBkcj.4619$XW3.2403@trnddc04... > JD <jd4x4@ wrote: >> For what its worth, here is how the Ancestry.com gedcom export cites a >> residence that was auto-entered (via adding to my online tree). > > Thanks, that's a reasonable answer, though it still seems > like overkill to me. Is it just me that is confused by this thread? The OP's question was simply: "Anyone aware of well-argued recommendations for how to cite census in GEDCOM SOUR structures?" As a reminder, the GEDCOM standard SOUR structure is: n @<XREF:SOUR>@ SOUR {1:1} +1 DATA {0:1} +2 EVEN <EVENTS_RECORDED> {0:M} +3 DATE <DATE_PERIOD> {0:1} +3 PLAC <SOURCE_JURISDICTION_PLACE> {0:1} +2 AGNC <RESPONSIBLE_AGENCY> {0:1} +2 <<NOTE_STRUCTURE>> {0:M} +1 AUTH <SOURCE_ORIGINATOR> {0:1} +2 [CONT|CONC] <SOURCE_ORIGINATOR> {0:M} +1 TITL <SOURCE_DESCRIPTIVE_TITLE> {0:1} +2 [CONT|CONC] <SOURCE_DESCRIPTIVE_TITLE> {0:M} +1 ABBR <SOURCE_FILED_BY_ENTRY> {0:1} +1 PUBL <SOURCE_PUBLICATION_FACTS> {0:1} +2 [CONT|CONC] <SOURCE_PUBLICATION_FACTS> {0:M} +1 TEXT <TEXT_FROM_SOURCE> {0:1} +2 [CONT|CONC] <TEXT_FROM_SOURCE> {0:M} +1 <<SOURCE_REPOSITORY_CITATION>> {0:1} +1 <<MULTIMEDIA_LINK>> {0:M} +1 <<NOTE_STRUCTURE>> {0:M} +1 REFN <USER_REFERENCE_NUMBER> {0:M} +2 TYPE <USER_REFERENCE_TYPE> {0:1} +1 RIN <AUTOMATED_RECORD_ID> {0:1} +1 <<CHANGE_DATE>> {0:1} and the citation within a referencing record structure is: n SOUR @<XREF:SOUR>@ /* pointer to source record */ {1:1} +1 PAGE <WHERE_WITHIN_SOURCE> {0:1} +1 EVEN <EVENT_TYPE_CITED_FROM> {0:1} +2 ROLE <ROLE_IN_EVENT> {0:1} +1 DATA {0:1} +2 DATE <ENTRY_RECORDING_DATE> {0:1} +2 TEXT <TEXT_FROM_SOURCE> {0:M} +3 [ CONC | CONT ] <TEXT_FROM_SOURCE> {0:M} +1 QUAY <CERTAINTY_ASSESSMENT> {0:1} +1 <<MULTIMEDIA_LINK>> {0:M} +1 <<NOTE_STRUCTURE>> {0:M} I see nothing here that is not self-explanatory. What is it in the OP's question that I am not understanding? Nigel www.tcgr.bufton.org

"Nigel Bufton" <nigel@bufton.org> wrote: > > I see nothing here that is not self-explanatory. What is it in the > OP's question that I am not understanding? :-) Dunno. I thought maybe it had more to do with what sort of text was appropriate but I wasn't totally sure myself. That's why I thought the auto-generated Ancestry entry might be of help.

JD <jd4x4@ wrote: > "Nigel Bufton" <nigel@bufton.org> wrote: >> I see nothing here that is not self-explanatory. What is it in the >> OP's question that I am not understanding? I saw nothing there that recommended what and how much to put in <SOURCE_ORIGINATOR>, <SOURCE_DESCRIPTIVE_TITLE>, <SOURCE_FILED_BY_ENTRY>, <SOURCE_PUBLICATION_FACTS>, or <TEXT_FROM_SOURCE> for census or any other particular source. > :-) Dunno. I thought maybe it had more to do with what sort of text was > appropriate but I wasn't totally sure myself. That's why I thought the > auto-generated Ancestry entry might be of help. It was helpful in that it showed one more entity's answer to the question. I poked around maybe a dozen online sites that let you see their GEDCOM, and it seems a mere "1930 Census" is the most popular answer. To me that's not enough. But neither do I feel that I need to say enough for a new arrival from Betelgeuse IV to find it blind-folded.