jane kelly wrote: >I was in the library yesterday ... and found: > > Banff 1785 > John CLYTON ... > I checked this entry with the IGI ... but the father is > named as Joseph CLAYTON ... which I find odd as > the handwriting was very clear and the spelling unique. __________________________________________ Hi Jane Recently I was discussing a new FreeREG project with one of the co-ordinators and found a very disturbing detail in the instructions for transcribers, something like: "... where a name is clearly not the modern spelling, the modern version should be substituted ..." I pointed out that this was "less than sensible" and that it corrupted the database without acknowledgment. The response: this was a "norm" for the IGI and other such transcriptions, but not always followed by transcribers. Personally I think this was a diabolical way to proceed and hope that most of the transcribers ignored it. If we are to have any faith at all in these on-line records, they absolutely MUST be faithful to the original. Many of the transcribers did put dashes where there found an unreadable letter or letter string. Unfortunately some of them are 'clever' and put what they think it 'should be'. Your experience shows that it is essential to look at the original as far as possible. I suspect the instructions were generated before Soundex and similar search methods became universal and was a way of making the search facilities more responsive. But introducing untraceable modifications to the records? Words fail me! Best wishes Ray Hennessy