newFamilySearch Version .92 out 3 March 2008

Discussions around Genealogy technology.
dsammy-p40
New Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:18 pm

first choice

Postby dsammy-p40 » Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:37 pm

jbh001 wrote:I prefer listing the cemetery in the place name instead of notes or sources because it simplifies many things (among them notes and sources).

Salt Lake City Cemetery, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake, Utah
Mount Olivet Cemetery, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake, Utah
Riverview Cemetery, Tremonton, Box Elder, Utah


Alternately, I have incorporated the name of the city into the cemetery name.

Salt Lake City Cemetery, Salt Lake, Utah
Salt Lake City Mount Olivet Cemetery, Salt Lake, Utah
Tremonton Riverview Cemetery, Box Elder, Utah


But I prefer the first solution because it think it is clearer and more consistent especially in those cases where a person wasn't buried in a cemetery, or the location of the cemetery is not known.

El Dorado, Salt Lake, Utah


the first group you listed is always my preference because it is most clear and to the point.:D

dsammy-p40
New Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:18 pm

4-level place names

Postby dsammy-p40 » Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:47 pm

RussellHltn wrote:One of the issues that probably needs to be addressed is how the different program parse the place name. While city/county/state/country works fine in the United States, the 4-level setup doesn't' always work world-wide.

Some programs, such as PAF Insight parse the place name from the right. It expects to see either the country (or the state) name there and doesn't really care about how many levels there are. I'm not sure how nFS does it, but with it's standardized place finder, I image that putting the cemetery name in the place name could mess things up.

It would be nice to put the cemetery name in because you can visit and see the headstone. Knowing what hospital someone was born or died in isn't very useful - that I know of. More important is what city/county to find the records.


Do tell - about the 4-level place setup - but I have a major problem with Germany. So many places requiring 5-level place names. 16 "Berg" in Bavaria alone. That requires "Bezirkamt" names to identify specific Berg. "Bezirkamt" in Bavaria is equal to "County" in USA, Kreis in former Prussian provinces, Oberamt in Baden & Wuerttemberg.

That is why I asked for the place-standardizations to keep the places straight, and that includes cemeteries and obviously churches, too. (here's the problem - Cincinnati, Ohio has so many Catholic churches, don't ask me which one my cousins were christened in, they were in so many of them!):)

the nFS is structured to go from left to right, ruling out the cities if it is not known....
-, Salt Lake, Utah is the only way to resolve that problem. Morgan in Ohio - 9 are villages and one is a county. Guess which one my folks came from (am I suppose to simply allow Morgan, Ohio?)

Thomas_Lerman
Member
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:54 am

Postby Thomas_Lerman » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:09 pm

I do wish that PAF resolved the place right to left as well. I do quite a few advanced focus/filters using the four place types (city, county, state, country) that works well for me in the USA and make it works pretty well for the motherlands my ancestry comes from (yes, I realize that may not work in all circumstances). However, I can see the right to left resolution would make it work better in other cases.


Return to “Family History”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest