Re: [Gramps-users] Medias, sources and sourcerefs

[Frederico M. <fs...@gm...>]

Hi,

2009/10/14 Hubert Toullec <hub...@nu...>:
>
> I am a relatively new user to genealogy and Gramps and I started to organize
> my source and media data upon the scheme "one source - one reference", which
> seemed at first the most intuitive to me. After studying several posts on
> the subject, I finally changed my mind and choosed the official way (as I
> understood it !) of doing things, ie "one source - multiple references". I
> also chose to attach transcription or source text notes to the media object,
> not to the source object.

As others already said there isn't an "official way". Many experienced
people favour different methods.

I do, in general, believe that the "one source - multiple references"
is closer to the way the GEDCOM tags were envisioned, and I use that
method myself.

I also share some of your doubts (I think I asked exactly the same in
this list months ago). After a while and several different experiments
I'm quite happy with the way I do things and most of the problems I
had are no longer quite as valid.

> To illustrate by an example :
> Before :
> Repository = none
> source = birth certificate of XXX, date DDD, archive AAA of parish PPP
> source notes = transcription of birth certificate
> media = scan of birth certificate of XXX, date DDD, archive AAA of parish
> PPP
> (As you see, this lead to some confusion between media and source for me !)

The naming of the media is always a tricky decision.

> After :
> Repository = parish PPP
> source = archive AAA
> sourceref = archive AAA, page scan NNN
> media = birth certificate of XXX, date = YYY, page scan NNN
> media notes = transcription of birth certificate
>
> with media objects appearing in the local Tab of source.
>
> The major drawback of this approach is that there is no direct link between
> the birth event and the associated media (scan of birth certificate) and I
> have to manage manually the reference (page or scan image number) in the
> media object name to find the good media object in the gallery tab. Not
> ideal !

I personally name the media objects in relation to the source (e.g. I
use names like "1854 Baptism, pg 12-13" instead of "Baptism of John
Smith, 1854") just because sometimes a single image can contain
different events. More importantly I add the source text (the
transcription) to the Source *and* to the media, if applicable. The
sharing of notes makes this simple and easy.

Since media objects also point to a source I use the name just to have
enough information for quickly knowing what it is, and leave the
details for the source reference.

As for the lack of direct link, I understand your problem. Since a
source can have multiple media objects it would be non-trivial to
automatically link a specific event to a specific image. I do the same
thing as you do, and basically add the relevant image to the event
gallery by hand.

> Now, my questions :
> Is this really the standard way of entering data, or is there a better one ?

It's hard to say what is the "standard way". There are others. I
prefer this one to the rest of them. Especially since I stopped
viewing Source References as things that are always the same and that
should be "shared" and began adding specific content to each source
reference (citation, etc).

> With this approach, how can I get the list of all events or individuals
> linked to a given sourceref (Archive AAA, scan NNN int the example) ?

I think that there is a filter for that available... see
http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=2831 .

Regards,

Frederico