[TSC-public] Format for Raw Source Content

Jan Murphy packrat74 at gmail.com
Fri Jan 9 12:52:53 EST 2015


Your two points are in direct contradiction with each other.  You say that
no one is arguing with me, while you continue to argue with me.

The very fact that you named your concept a "persona" demonstrates your
person-centric bias.

What you call a "persona" I call an "index slip".  If I were using the
paper system I was trained in, or making a computer version of it, I would
have a slip for ALL of the different elements in each entry, not just for
the person.  All raw data could be fetched by any one of those elements,
not just the names and a handful of other elements which were chosen to be

Yes, the difference between our viewpoints is subtle, but it is an
important one.  You are getting ahead of the information.

It is the same kind of shorthand that beginners do when they say "my father
said that he was 35 years old" when they are looking at the census record,
when in reality, it is the record which says that he was 35 years old, and
the record says that the enumerator said so, and we don't know how many
times that information was copied between the original household schedule
and the summary sheet we are looking at.

You are not skipping over as many steps as that, but you are still jumping
ahead in the process.

I repeat this over and over again, because when analyzing language, even
the divisions between words is not a given.  Every bit of markup to divide
the information into elements like the ones you used in your example is an
act of interpretation by the researcher.  So I can't ignore these subtle
points.  If I skip over these things, I can't do my work properly.


Jan Murphy
packrat74 at gmail.com

On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Thomas Wetmore <ttw4 at verizon.net> wrote:

> Sue,
> 1. No one is arguing with Jan, since we all (the FHISO posters) agree with
> the importance of sources.
> 2. Personas are a source-centric concept. It might like to look a little
> deeper.
> Tom
> > On Jan 9, 2015, at 6:06 AM, Family Folk <familyfolklore at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 09/01/2015 02:50, Jan Murphy wrote:
> >>
> >> I hate to keep arguing this point over and over again, but we are
> looking at documents and other source material.  We are not looking at
> people.  We are looking at sources, most of which (but not all) contain
> names.
> >>
> >> A lot of beginning researchers, including many of the people in the
> Genealogy Do-Over group, struggle to learn how to cite their sources, and
> why? Because if you work in a people-centric system the sources are always
> an afterthought.
> >
> > Jan, you can't repeat this enough.
> >
> > Would everyone please repeat 3 times daily:
> > Work with the source first , not people.
> >
> > For Tom, please repeat 3 time per minute (because I am irritated, not
> picking on him):
> > people-centric personas are tyranny :-)
> >
> >
> > Sue Adams
> >
> > Family Folk
> > Web: familyfolk.co.uk
> > Blog: Family Folklore Blog
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TSC-public mailing list
> > TSC-public at fhiso.org
> > http://fhiso.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc-public_fhiso.org
> _______________________________________________
> TSC-public mailing list
> TSC-public at fhiso.org
> http://fhiso.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc-public_fhiso.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://fhiso.org/pipermail/tsc-public_fhiso.org/attachments/20150109/a5953517/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the TSC-public mailing list