Add acknowledgement to the source of our information (such as the record office) to the detailed results page

[PatReynolds]

Including link to their website. Info about record office or other holding institution

[Sherlock21]

The last time a question of adding urls for external links came up, it seemed to get the thumbs down, due to the resource necessary to maintain them.

SO you would need to have a policy establishing to cover that.

The only url link that I am aware of, is the Location of the Place (in FR). and that's going to be an issue shortly as Genuki are changing all theirs. - and this will be no mean feat, given our present staffing position. see #1308

[PatReynolds]

We need to have at least the ability (it is being made a condition of access to images). Ideally, there is a list somewhere that we could regularly harvest. E.g. http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/find-an-archive

[Sherlock21]

Which results page please? The Researcher's Search results? Or these stats results that you have also referred to recently? What is the purpose of this link or reference? or both?? Does this reference need to be just a text line? Or might some want a pictorial logo as well? And if this is about Researcher Search Results, then what do you specify for the results that pull in records from more than one RO? This will happen when the results cross the County Boundaries in a Nearby search.

[edickens]

The researcher results page, but the information will come from the County, Place and Church record. The idea is to point out, without the researcher having to click on the Place, Church, that there are other places to get more information. This is so that others see that we want to work with them and point researchers to them. Hopefully they will then see that it is worth their while working with us, rather than other websites. Also, it justifies our existence by promoting further research and genealogy tourism. I suggest just text, but it needs to be a banner or something that comes up when they select and entry. Pop-ups are not a good idea as they can be blocked. It would be the detailed result, because we would not want to show this information for an entry that was not relevant to the researcher. This needs specifying in detail.

[Sherlock21]

I agree with Eric D's very last line in the previous comment. In fact: a mockup actual example or what it would look like would be the best way of getting the point across. "A picture is worth a thousand words....."

The opening comment said: (it is being made a condition of access to images). So exactly what -and how- are they requiring please? Lets not build something that's not required or does not meet the requirement

[Captainkirkdawson]

Before you go off defining new fields in inappropriate documents can I remind you that those fields and others already exist in the register document, In almost all cases they are empty as no one has entered the information. As I reminded you in 1267 an entry has access to this information since it belongs to a batch which belongs to a register (which belongs to a church which belongs to a place)

[Captainkirkdawson]

It is proposed that we add a link to the source of the information by linking to the register collection information where this information should be retained.

[Captainkirkdawson]

@SteveBiggs The register contains credit, status and source fields . The image server source has more detailed information on the source and restrictions. Should we be linking the 2?BUT it is possible that the register has multiple sources so there are issues with linkage. Should we be using the register credit field rather than the individual file credit field?. These fields are freeform. I suggest that the register status field use the image status field definitions https://github.com/FreeUKGen/MyopicVicar/blob/bevbranch5/lib/source_property.rb

[SteveBiggs]

I like the idea of using the register credit field because it's far easier to add this to registers that have already been transcribed rather than having to add to each individual file. It would also be good if this credit populated the "Contribution by these ..... " field under Transcriptions:

[Captainkirkdawson]

A little confused . Are we to have 2 or 3 fields in the details? 1)Transcribed by 2) Who contributed to its creation (ie credit) and 3) The source of the record that was transcribed Or just 1 and 3

[SteveBiggs]

I think we only need two fields; 'Transcribed by' and 'Source', but historical confusion has been caused by the naming of fields in WinREG particularly of 'Source' for the first set of comments: This has often understandably, been used to record the name of the RO or other institution that supplied the images rather than the 'Credit to' field below (which if used at all, has generally repeated the name and email address of the transcriber).

[PatReynolds]

Possibly all three, created by (eg church, local authority or other name), transcribed by, and acknowledgement/other eg intermediate source (Phillimores) by kind permission of Vicar of ..., Original held at .. .

[Captainkirkdawson]

@SteveBiggs I have had Bev write a rake task to explore what is contained in the various header fields. I am afraid to say the there is little that is consistent in their content for the comments fields. There are 10,000 unique entries!!!!) Even SSX which is likely the "best" has 100s of files with non source information. I will let you have the collection dump when things are quieter but my bottom line conclusion is that the comments field of the header is not viable. Even the source field in the register is limited to the following unique values

Bath RO photographic copies of Original Register Bishop's Transcript Bishops Transcripts BT BTs BTs and PRs Cambridge Records Office Doncaster FHS Dwelly's Transcript CD Fiche from SHC http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~davidbeare/CurryRivel/curryrivel01.htm http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pbtyc/H_m_w/Kittisford/Index.html http://www.durtnall.org.uk/Somerset%20Pages.htm http://www.portbury-hundred.co.uk/ L Latter Day Saints LDS LDS Burials Books LDS Film 1526112 Library images National Archives nk Non-Conformist Records Norfolk Records Office NRO Parish records Parish Register Parish Registers Phillimore Photographed by Bob & Pat Chown Photographs from RO Phtographs from RO PR Rev C H Mayo RO photographs Roy Parkhouse transcriptions SEAX SHC SHC fiche SHC FICHE M14743 - 1 & M14743 - 2 SHC registers and fiche SHC? Somerset History Centre source South West Heritage Trust DEV Suffolk Records Office Thoresby Society Transcription Thoresby Society Transcripts Timothy Jollie's Register of baptisms Transcription Transcription by W J Stavert MA FSA, published 1912 and 1915 Unknown W West Sussex Record Office Wisbech and Fenland Museum

[Captainkirkdawson]

Based on the preceding analysis I am tempted to propose that we not show the source information in the search details field

[Captainkirkdawson]

The SSX comment1 list of unique values was 171 42743 42757 42770 42779 42789 42806 42896 42924 42949 42950 42961 42972 42976 42981 43005 43037 43065 43079 43099 43110

19/10/2016 Parish Registers SSX-Shipley-GR-1733-1772-168-1-1-3

20/10/2016 SSX-Shipley-GR-1733-1772-168-1-1-3

43163 Parish Registers SSX-Yapton-BA-1853-1876-225-temp

West Sussex Records Office Ifield Parish Registers 12-Jan-05

1813-1903 1837-1900 Angmering Parish Registers, Sussex Record Society, 1913 Baptism Records 1558 to 1812 converted from transcript at barriesgenealogy.co.uk Baptism Records 1807 to 1837 converted from transcript at barriesgenealogy.co.uk Bolney Parish Registers Bolney Parish Registers, Sussex Record Society, 1912 Burials 1803-1834 Burials 1813-1843 Burials 1828-1847 Copy of Parish Register 1890 Cowfold Parish Register Cuckfield Parish Registers data converted from Excel spreadsheet of Dorothy Spence Englishparishregisters.Com FHL Film 1067139 General Register GR GR-1646-1812-79-1-1-1 Marriage Records 1571 to 1837 converted from transcript at barriesgenealogy.co.uk Marriages 1822-1834 Microfiche of Parish Records Other Transcrip Other Transcript P R T Society P.R.T. Society Pafrish Registers Paish registers Parish Parish Baptism Records 1760 to 1812 Parish General Record Parish General Register Parish General Register + some BT inclutions Parish General Register + some BT notes Parish General Register 2 Parish General Register with some recovered BTs Parish Record Parish Records Parish Records. Parish Register Parish Register Transcripts Parish Registers Parish Registers 1813-1837 Verified Parish Registers 1813-1856 Verified Parish Registers GR Parish Registers of Ardingly Parish Registers SSX-Ashington-GR-1736-1812-9-1-1-1 Verified Parish Registers SSX-ChichesterTheClose-46-1-5-1-BU-1813-1863 Verified Parish Registers SSX-Coates-Par-51-1-3-1-Temp-BA-1813-1881 Verified Parish Registers SSX-Cocking-53-1-2-1-BA-1813-1871 Verified Parish Registers SSX-Graffham-BA-1813-1873-93-1-2-1 Verified Parish Registers SSX-Nuthurst-1813-1875-143-1-5-1 Verified Parish Registers SSX-Slaugham-MA-Banns-1754-1812-483-1-1-4 Verified Parish Registers SSX-Woolbeding-216-1-1-3-BA-BU-1763-1812 Verified Parish Registers SSX-Woolbeding-216-1-1-4-MA-Banns-1754-1810 Verified Parish Registers SSX-Woolbeding-216-1-3-1-MA-1813-1837 Verified Parish Registers Transcripts Parish Registers. Parish Registerss Parish registersSSX-Felpham-BU-1813-1882-84-1-5-1 Parish Regiters Parish Regitsers Parish Rgisters Parish Tegisters Parish: St Bartholomew, Burwash, Sussex, Marriages 1699 - 1717 Patish Registers Pistersarish R PRT Society SSX-Balcombe-GR-1708-1747-234-1-1-4 SSX-ChichesterStMartin-BU-1813-1885-40-1-5-1 SSX-Climping-51-1-2-1-BA-1813-1876 SSX-Compton-Par-56-1-1-5-MA-1785-1809 SSX-Compton-Par-56-1-2-1-BA-1813-1875 SSX-Eartham-MA-1813-1836-74-1-3-1 SSX-Henfield-BU-1679-1695-100-1-1-2 SSX-Henfield-GR-1695-1721-100-1-1-3 SSX-Henfield-MA-1813-1837-100-1-3-1 SSX-Iping-BU-1813-1875-110-1-5-1 SSX-Iping-GR-1739-1799-110-1-1-2 SSX-Linch123-1-1-1-GR-1701-1780 SSX-Linch-123-1-1-1-GR-1701-1780 SSX-Linch-123-1-1-1-GR-1710-1780 SSX-Linch-123-1-1-2-GR-1781-1812 SSX-Linch-123-1-2-1-BA-1781-1812 SSX-Linch-123-1-2-1-BA-1813-1876 SSX-Linch-123-temp-BU-1814-1880 SSX-Linch-123-temp-MA-1849-1876 SSX-Merston-MA-1811-136-1-1-3 SSX-MidLavant-121-1-1-1-GR-1567-1748 SSX-MidLavant-121-1-1-2-BU-1735-1798 SSX-MidLavant-121-1-1-2-GR-1735-1798 SSX-MidLavant-121-1-5-1-BU-1813-1879 SSX-NorthStoke-GR-1565-1692-184-1-1-1 SSX-NorthStoke-GR-1692-1761-184-1-1-2 SSX-NorthStoke-GR-1736-1812-184-1-1-3 SSX-Rumboldswhyke-GR-1747-1812-161-1-1-2 SSX-Rumboldswhyke-MA-1754-1812-161-1-1-3 SSX-Singleton-174-1-1-2-GR-1728-1788 SSX-Singleton-174-1-1-3-Banns-MA-1755-1812 SSX-Singleton-174-1-1-4-BA-BU-1789-1812 SSX-Singleton-174-1-3-1-MA-1813-1837 SSX-Singleton-Linch-123-1-3-1-MA-1813-1834 SSX-Slaugham-GR-1749-1780-483-1-1-2 SSX-Slindon-BA-1813-1874-175-1-2-1 SSX-Terwick-194-1-1-1-GR-1571-1685 SSX-Warningcamp-GR-1572-1717-204-1-1-1 Sussex Record Society Transcript, volXXI, 1915 Sussex Record Society Volume XXI, 1915 Sussex Record Society Volume XXIV 1917 Sussex Record Society, Volume XXI Sussex Record Society, Volume XXIV, 1917 Sussex Record Society, Volume XXV, 1917 Sussex Record Society, volXXI Sussex Record Society. Volume XXIV 1917 Sussex Record Society.VolXXI Sussex Records Society, Volume XXI Transcript Transcript of Parish Register Transcript of Parish Register 1977 Transcript of Parish Register TR Transcript of Parish Registers by L.W. Cunnington, 1945 Transcripts West Suffolk Record Office SSX-HorshamHolyTrinity-BA-1879-1903-103-1-2-1 Verified West Surrey Record Office West Sussex office West Sussex Parish Records West Sussex Record Offfice West Sussex Record Office West Sussex Record Office West Sussex Record Office SSX-ChichesterSt Martin-BA-1875-1903-40-1-2-1 Verified West Sussex Record Office SSX-ChichesterStMartin-BU-1875-1891-40-1-5-1 Verified West Sussex Record Office SSX-ChichesterStMartin-MA-1875-1899-40-1-3-2 Verified West Sussex Record Office SSX-Eastergate-BA-1872-1902-76-1-2-1 Verified West Sussex Record Office SSX-Eastergate-BU-1875-1900-76-1-5-1 Verified West Sussex Record Office SSX-Eastergate-MA-1875-1900-76-1-3-2 Verified West Sussex Record Office SSX-KingstonBySea-MA-1841-1900-115-1-3-2 Verified West Sussex Record Office SSX-Thakeham-1874-1900-195-1-2-2 Verified West Sussex Record Officw West Sussex Record Offie West Sussex record Ofice West Sussex Records Office West Sussex Redord Office West Sussex Register Office West Sussex Registry Office West Suyssex Record Office WestSussex Record Office

[Sherlock21]

In a way, this diverse collection of field contents is not surprising, its it? As It has been left to individuals to put their own interpretation onto the title of the filed, and without any clues as to what the filed was being used for, what you see, is no surprise to me.

IF the field is to be used in any analysis in any manner, then there needs to be a definition of the structure of the content in the least - or perhaps drop the field completely.?

[SteveBiggs]

What Eric says is true. Most of the 171 variants in Sussex were entered before I became SSX coordinator. My interpretation of field 1 (called "Source" in WinREG) was the source of the images. To start with, I had my transcribers put 'Parish Register' but after a while I decided it more appropriate to put 'West Sussex Record Office' so even I have been inconsistent and every other coord will interpret it different again. Also, some transcribers have misinterpreted what I asked them to do and swapped field 3 and 4 or combined them into a single field 3.

As Eric says, we either need a definition of each field or just scrap them altogether.

[Captainkirkdawson]

I agree with your comments. As a result the source information will be taken solely from what has been entered by the CC for the register. Wrt to the comments in the header we will continue to just store them. When we rewrite as part of #1401 we will drop the field. @EmJayFry should be aware of this.

[Captainkirkdawson]

No further action is proposed and this can be closed at next scrum