FamilySearch has been plugging standardised place-names, which is not
a bad idea but has now gone too far -- their software triest to
automatically substitute "standard" place names for non-standard ones,
but in the process it often inserts a place name that is entirely
wrong and misleading, wand will ruin the usefulness of their
collaborative family tree.
In my opinion, the location is so that I can go to any current map and
locate where the family lived. In this way when in the area I can easily travel to that location. If I use the name of community that no longer exist, I may never find the family farm. The historical location is put
in the description, or a note if the information on the historical
location is to large for the description.
On 10/30/21 8:51 AM, knuttle wrote:
In my opinion, the location is so that I can go to any current map and
locate where the family lived. In this way when in the area I can
easily travel to that location. If I use the name of community that
no longer exist, I may never find the family farm. The historical
location is put in the description, or a note if the information on
the historical location is to large for the description.
The problem with trying to record what a place is called 'now' is that
'now' changes. Do you really work hard to keep up on how EVERY place
might get adjusted. For some places, that may be fairly stable, but for others (like eastern Europe) it is quite fluid.
That is why MY standard (and I will allow that others may do it
differently) is to record the place as it was at that time, with
comments of how that might have changed in more modern times.
When I copy this event to my own family tree, it does not copy the
original event place, but the spurious Chichester one.
I hope the people at FamilySearch will soon correct this software bug,
but until they do, people who use FamiloySearch should be warned that
they need to treat every place name as suspect.
Ancestry.com have long done this kind of thing, but it is new on
FamilySearch.
One I came across was my gg-grandfather's christening at St Thomas >Charterhouse, Clerkenwell (now demolished). The Family Search index
shows it as St Thomas, Virgin Isles!
It seems to have gone from bad to worse. Of the browsers I regularly
use (I won't use Chrome or its derivatives) only Firefox now works.
This seems to be a recent trend in web-sites: using developers who are, >presumably young, inexperienced and not aware that the web was designed
to provide a universal platform so that users with a wide variety of >platforms could access the same material. Too clever by half so not
clever enough.
A message to all web developers: if your site won't work on the user's
chosen browser it's not the user's fault; it's yours.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:23:54 +0000
Ian Goddard <ianng@austonley.org.uk> wrote:
It seems to have gone from bad to worse. Of the browsers I regularly
use (I won't use Chrome or its derivatives) only Firefox now works.
This seems to be a recent trend in web-sites: using developers who
are, presumably young, inexperienced and not aware that the web was
designed to provide a universal platform so that users with a wide
variety of platforms could access the same material. Too clever by
half so not clever enough.
A message to all web developers: if your site won't work on the
user's chosen browser it's not the user's fault; it's yours.
I use Opera and it works fine.
On 22/02/2022 20:15, Nigel Reed wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:23:54 +0000
Ian Goddard <ianng@austonley.org.uk> wrote:
It seems to have gone from bad to worse. Of the browsers I regularly
use (I won't use Chrome or its derivatives) only Firefox now works.
This seems to be a recent trend in web-sites: using developers who
are, presumably young, inexperienced and not aware that the web was
designed to provide a universal platform so that users with a wide
variety of platforms could access the same material. Too clever by
half so not clever enough.
A message to all web developers: if your site won't work on the
user's chosen browser it's not the user's fault; it's yours.
I use Opera and it works fine.
That was my point. Opera is one of those Chrome derivatives.
I use Opera and it works fine.
That was my point. Opera is one of those Chrome derivatives.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 86:36:11 |
| Calls: | 6,658 |
| Files: | 12,203 |
| Messages: | 5,333,788 |