[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
paf-digest V2000 #14
paf-digest Monday, February 21 2000 Volume 2000 : Number 014
In this issue:
Re: [PAF] pointer's
[PAF] Notes switching
[PAF] State Boundary Changes
See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the PAF
or PAF-Digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 16:08:25 EST
From: Mlharline@aol.com
Subject: Re: [PAF] pointer's
In a message dated 2/18/00 11:30:30 AM Pacific Standard Time,
hpscuba@toast.net writes:
> did a check file and came up with a bunch of pointer errors.
> example Individual 893 less pointer (960) is not less.
> Individual 1479 greater pointer (1653) is not greater.
>
It has something to do with internal data structure and PAF 4 checked it
where previous versions didn't. PAF 4.04 is supposed to correct most of
these when you run Check-Repair.
Mary Lou
============================================================================
For assistance and help for the PAF Mailing List please contact
ed.rogers@innernet.org or http://www.innernet.org/paf/
============================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 1972 20:28:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Cheryl Singhal <csinghal@CapAccess.org>
Subject: [PAF] Notes switching
First, let's make sure I'm right about this:
in PAF 2.x, if I wanted something *TO* print on the FGS, I marked it with
a !
in PAF 4.x, the ! means it won't print?
So, if I'm right -- that an item marked to print in 2.x is now marked to
NOTPRINT in 4.x -- is there a quick and relatively painless way to make
that change? I've got over 20,000 records in a PAF 2.x db, each with at
least ONE line I don't want to print, many with only 1 line I do want to
print, and a huge number with 2 or more screens of lines I don't want
printed. Even by massaging the GED file, that's a lot of lines to change.
OTOH, if I'm wrong and the ! will print in 4.x as well, PLEEEEEEAAAASSSEEE
tell me!
(Example:
NOTES:
!lived in Madison, Wisconsin.
Bulletin Jan 1954 gives
b 22-22-99 -m- 12-12-12, d 1-1-54 wdo 2 son, 1 gs
undtd ltr from Joe-Blow gives
WW II AAF vet, Normandy; BS Harvard; PhD GaTech; taught UTx
Bulletin Dec 1946 gives
participated in the 2nd wave at Normandy, wounded left thigh, evac'd
London, hsp bombed, met wife a WRAF staffer at Huston-on-Thames -m- 6 wks
later. Recupe @ home in VT 8 months; awarded purple heart, DSC; Lions
Club, Masons, Eagle Scout.
END NOTE
)
One reason I don't want to print all that is that I don't have ROOM to
print these details for each of 12,000 men, another is that I'd have to
translate the notes into real sentences, which would take up even more
room.
============================================================================
For assistance and help for the PAF Mailing List please contact
ed.rogers@innernet.org or http://www.innernet.org/paf/
============================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:05:21 -0700
From: "Thomas D. Sevy" <sevy99@deseretonline.com>
Subject: [PAF] State Boundary Changes
While looking at some of my ancestors who went from New England to
West Virginia in the early 1700s, I noticed that some said a person
was born 1808 in Pocahontas county, Virginia and another source or
entry in Family Search would say they were born 1808 in Pocahontas
County, West Virginia. I saw so much of this that I went to my
Everton Genealogy Handbook and discovered something that I should have
remembered from High School U.S. History. During the civil war, the
eastern part of Virginia went with the Confederacy and the Western
part joined the Union as a new state in about 1865. Therefore,
Pocahontas County was part of Virginia in 1808, but was part of West
Virginia starting in 1865. I know that such problems occur even more
often with counties, but when a state changes boundaries it's a little
more of a problem -- at least to me. To be fully accurate, the birth
in 1808 should be recorded Virginia. But, and to me it's a big BUT,
this will be confusing to others who read the record and don't know
the history. I'd like to know how others have handled this issue.
For example if you want to look all the Seavey's born in West
Virginia, you'll miss the pre1865 one's when doing a search.
This illustrates one of my high priorities on the PAF4 wish list for
future changes. I'd like to put an asterisk or some other signal to
the reader that there is an important explanation of the information
in a particular field. It would have to be specially programmed in to
avoid affecting a sort or messing up a date. For example, if you have
two versions of a birth date or two versions of a location or a name
was changed or you have new information that contradicts what was
previously assumed to be so. I would really like such a signal.
I look forward especially to comments about my State Boundary Changes
question.
Tom Sevy
============================================================================
For assistance and help for the PAF Mailing List please contact
ed.rogers@innernet.org or http://www.innernet.org/paf/
============================================================================
------------------------------
End of paf-digest V2000 #14
***************************
To unsubscribe to PAF-Digest, send the following command to
majordomo@innernet.org:
unsubscribe paf-digest
At this point there is no direct method to receive back issues other than
to email ed.rogers@innernet.org. Happy PAF'ing!