From: Benny M. <ben...@gm...> - 2013-06-17 21:40:44
|
2013/6/17 John Ralls <jr...@ce...> > > On Jun 17, 2013, at 2:35 PM, Benny Malengier <ben...@gm...> > wrote: > > > > > 2013/6/17 Paul Franklin <pf....@gm...> > >> On 6/17/13, Benny Malengier <ben...@gm...> wrote: >> > Let me explain. I've never seen in a reference the call number in a >> > repository being used. I image eg my library, where a book has number >> 1234. >> > One does not add that to the citation. >> >> That seems a poor analogy/metaphor, as there will be many >> copies of any given book, in many libraries, so of course you >> would refer to a book by its title and author, or some unique >> referent. >> >> For an only-one-archive's only-one-document I can imagine >> that the archive's unique designation ("call number" or whatever) >> might well be the best way to describe it. >> > > Ok, but then it will be seen in the source fields like this: > > Caller ID: <no repository defined> > > And user must add a repository to actually be able to use this field. > A lot more work. As John says, repository should not be added that often. > Of course, we could add an override checkbox, and if user checks it, the > Caller ID becomes editable in the source fields. We might need that anyway > for repository location ... > > Perhaps you can go over the EE templates and see if there are some that > make use of this? > > > No, John does not say that Repository should not be added that often. John > says that Repository > should not be used for *published works*. But published works should be > used mostly as a finding > aid, a guide to the original documents (or facsimiles like microfilms or > digital images): Derivative > sources, whether transcripts, abstracts, or compiled genealogies are > subject to human error and > should be used as evidence only when there is no other choice. Original > records are found at > repositories, genealogists should use original records, so the Repository > template should be used a lot! > Sorry, misunderstood meaning of published. No English native after all. > > The citation templates for original records are found in EE Archives & > Artifacts>Archived Material, in > which there are 3 Manuscript templates which you would select depending > upon how the archive catalogues > its material. One of those will probably work for just about any archive > you can find so long as you're flexible > about the title. > > Regards, > John Ralls > > > > |