Missing District data

[resnape]

The following districts are not being returned from the BMDDIST.TXT file. (Note: These districts were contained in a 1964 transcription for marriages)

Cardigan S.,8a Cambridge,4a Durham C.,1a E. Elloe,3b King's L.,4b Leicester C.,3a Leighton B.,4a Marylebone,5c Middlesboro',1b Middlesex S.,3a Radnor E.,8c St. Asaph,8a St. Germans,7a St. Helens,10f St. Neots,4b St. Pancras,5d Stoke,9b Sutton Coldf'ld,9c W. Glamorgan,8b

Design Observation: Remove the embedded BMDDIST.TXT, BMDTXT2.TXT and BMDNAME.TXT files so that it is not necessary to rebuilt MacBMD-X every time there is a change to the content of these files.

[stwf]

The town data is stored in the bmd_districts.txt file inside the app bundle. Items added here will be available after relaunching the app. BMDDIST.TXT and BMDDIST2.TXT are no longer used.

I will leave it to Peter Adams if this data should be added.

[resnape]

Thanks. I have figured out the logic of storing the District data, except for the 10th data item which does not appear to do anything in the code. The 1971 Deaths districts have a great many differences and having to type in the District was slowing the process. So I have, for my own edification and use, created an updated bmd_town_dump.txt file. I have recorded the changes in a separate spreadsheet. I shall shortly being transcribing 1974 births and I expect another raft of different districts.

[stwf]

ok, you could also make those changes in a branch of the code and make a pull request on that too. It would make it easier for Peter to review and incorporate your changes. Thanks

[stwf]

The changes you emailed to me have been put in this branch: https://github.com/stwf/BMD-X/compare/data-fixes

They should be double checked and this can then be closed

[resnape]

As requested I have double checked the file. There appears to be numerous entries after a new entry shows a deletion and insertion when there has been no change. I am assuming that this is just an artefact with the system processing?

The following new entry appears to be missing. Here,1,1971,,,,,7c,7c,

Otherwise all is good

[stwf]

ok thanks. I added here! Also I think I cleaned up all of those false changes, I wasn't sure what that was. Thanks. Notice these changes aren't in 1.0.8. I'm just waiting for final confirmation to roll them in.

[archerbarrie]

I am concerned about the comment by resnape on 24th March 2015 that the code does not do anything with the 10th item in the district file. The last 5 items are the volumes for the 5 periods when a particular volume structure was used so the 10th item is the volume that should be used from 1st April 1974. If the 10th item is not being used then the volume will be wrong from that date. Furthermore the implication of the districts being different for 1971 is that the latest districts file is not being used - it is available at http://www.freebmd.org.uk/addons/winbmd/Districts.txt

[resnape]

Please ignore this observation. I have subsequently deduced how the code accesses the 10th item in the district file. The only other observation that I have regarding the district file is that there is an additional space between the district name and the preceding comma. This manifests itself in a space in the transcription output in the same position.

[archerbarrie]

Thanks. The district file contains four districts with commas: Bradford, W. Newport, Sh. Richmond, S. Whitchurch, S. In the resulting transcription these have to be enclosed in quotes (since the fields are comma delimited). The standard district file does not have an extra space as described. So is the issue that an extra space have been inserted before the comma in the resulting transcription? Or does every district have an extra space after the preceding (field separating) comma in the transcription? Or is a non-standard district file being used?

[resnape]

Apologies I was not very succinct in my explanation. This is a sample of the current districts file used in the latest MacBMD-X (1.0.9)

Abingdon,,,3,2001,6,2c,6a,6a,20 Acle,1,1939,1,1974,,4b,4b,4b, Alcester,,,3,1985,16,6d,9c,9c,31

After the 10th entry 20 & 31 there is a hard space which manifests in the following in the transcribed file:

SNEDDON,JENNIFER J.,WAKEFIELD,ABINGDON,20 ,0521 SNEDDON,PATRICIA A. E.,BROWN,ALCESTER,31 ,0125S

i.e. a space after the district numbers 20 & 31.

I have resolved this by using a locally modified districts file but I am looking at a low priority software suggestion for Steve to consider to cater for such spaces

[stwf]

Yes, I can absolutely clear this up. Let me know if there are any other issues that need to be cleared up.