* Source Record Title confusion

[BEJ]

My initial question was not about templates, but rather the FH7 Title field. More generally, my interest lies in the transferability of my FH7 data to other platforms I use and those used by anyone who may utilize my research. I’m attempting to clarify how the FH7 Source Record Title and Short Title are treated by GEDCOM. My request (admittedly poorly framed) was for some help in understanding the relationship.

Based on my review of the numerous responses—thanks all—, some more research, and exporting GEDCOM files to a couple of other programs, I see that FH7 Source Record Title, a.k.a. Long Title, and the Source Title are different. This is stated in the CP help text I quoted, but I don’t yet grasp the difference.

What confuses me is that the Source Record Title (SOUR.TITL) is associated with the Author and Publication info in the Citation Window. If SOUR.TITL is not the title of a book, for instance, where is that information recorded?

When I export a GEDCOM file, how is the SOUR.TITL treated? However, two other programs correctly label those entries as “Title.” Can anyone explain?

Is the Short Title (SOUR.ABBR) also a Source Record Title rather than a title of a source?

Following is a screenshot of an exported FH7 GEDCOM file displayed in GEDVIEW. Note the “Title” is my SOUR.TITL and the “Filed By” entry is my SOUR.ABBR.

---------------
EDITED TO REMOVE REFERENCE TO SOURCES AS NOTE RECORDS IN GEDCOM (I see now I got that wrong, and no one responded to it so safe to remove). - BEJ 1 March 2023

[Mark1834]

Using Templated Sources, you can have a more detailed Bibliography and/or footnote entry for a source; the Record Title (IIRC) isn't included in reports.

Lorna is correct. That is another rather sweeping statement that is missing the all-important “by default”. It’s straight-forward to configure a Templated Source footnote to use either the full source title or selected elements of it.

[AdrianBruce]

I’m attempting to clarify how the FH7 Source Record Title and Short Title are treated by GEDCOM.

At risk of being unhelpful, GEDCOM doesn't say anything about how to treat those two items. It only defines them and it's up to the software (and the researcher) to decide how to treat them.

+1 TITL <SOURCE_DESCRIPTIVE_TITLE> {0:1} p.62
Is the Title - the definition of it is:

SOURCE_DESCRIPTIVE_TITLE:= {Size=1:248}
The title of the work, record, or item and, when appropriate, the title of the larger work or series of which it is a part.
For a published work, a book for example, might have a title plus the title of the series of which the book is a part.
...
For An unpublished work, such as:
A letter might include the date, the sender, and the receiver.
...

So in other words, the simplest case for a published book is that TITL contains the title of the book. The simplest case for an unpublished document is that TITL contains some sort of description of the document that can be used to find it in the Archives' Catalogue.

The shorter item (Short Title / ABBR / whatever) is defined as

SOURCE_FILED_BY_ENTRY:= {Size= 1:60}
This entry is to provide a short title used for sorting, filing, and retrieving source records.

This means (in my GEDCOM head-canon) that this is an internal item used by the researcher to find (etc) the Source-Records in your GEDCOM file. Fundamentally, it's up to the researcher how to use that Short Title - it may bear zero relationship to anything in the real world, though it would be a hugely clunky usage if it really did have zero relationship.

So for instance, my Short Title for a soldier's papers will look something like

Service Records: Cooper EW, RGA, First World War

That's how I find Uncle Ern's WW1 service papers - looking for that Short Title. On the other hand, someone else might file the same source record with a Short Title of

Cooper EW, Service Records, First World War, RGA

Both are equally valid as the item is for internal usage only.

Now, where it all gets messy is when you start looking at exporting by the various methods. So far as I remember, Templated Sources don't use the Short Title at all. (At least, not out of the box). They do use the (long) Title. However, the whole idea of Templated Sources (and please note I don't use them) is that they allow finer granularity. Hence, for an unpublished document, the researcher might split the description of the document (used to find it in the Archives' Catalogue) into several templated items. Those several items can be concatenated automatically into a defined format to create a single (long) Title, as well as the granular items. Yes, that's duplication but it allows a single item to contain a useful description. (Arguably you might think this is straying into Short Title territory??? )

When stuff is exported - and I'm relying on fallible memory here - the different export methods allow the user to define what goes into the (long) Title and what into the Short Title on the output GEDCOM. The exporter is, in essence, in charge and they define correct usage.

IIRC, this was one aspect why I didn't care for templated sources - the default usage seemed different from my usage of (long) Title and Short Title. I'm not wholly convinced that Calico Pie treat Short Title in their GEDCOM head-canon in the same way that I do.

[AdrianBruce]

... However, two other programs correctly label those entries as “Title.” Can anyone explain? ...

That's probably just down to the way different software interprets and labels stuff. They have a different GEDCOM head-canon.

[BEJ]

Thanks, Adrian. Most of it makes sense.

So in other words, the simplest case for a published book is that TITL contains the title of the book. The simplest case for an unpublished document is that TITL contains some sort of description of the document that can be used to find it in the Archives' Catalogue.

However, your statement above contradicts CP’s help text referring to the Source Record Title: “This is the name by which that Source record is known within Family Historian (this record title should not to be confused with the title of a book or document, which the Source record may itself represent).”

That’s the major source of my confusion. Is the FH7 Title field the title of the record or the title of the source (i.e., book, journal entry, etc.)? If one makes up a descriptive title of a source, where is the actual title of tbe source documented?

[tatewise]

Based on my review of the numerous responses—thanks all—, some more research, and exporting GEDCOM files to a couple of other programs, I see that FH7 Source Record Title, a.k.a. Long Title, and the Source Title are different. This is stated in the CP help text I quoted, but I don’t yet grasp the difference.

I could not find where the FH help says the Long Title, and the Source Title are different.
Both the Generic Source records and Templated Source records always use %SOUR.TITL% to hold the (long) Title.
The only difference is that Generic Source Titles are always created manually whereas Templated Source Titles are usually autogenerated via the Source Template definition of the Title Format, but that can be overridden to allow them to be created manually. So whereas you could easily make a Generic Source Title match the title of the book it represents, that would be more difficult with a Templated Source Title unless the Title Format template was designed that way.

Exported GEDCOM always use %SOUR.TITLE% to hold the (long) Title.
Any of the other standard GEDCOM fields such as %SOUR.ABBR% and %SOUR.AUTH% and %SOUR.REPO% can also be used by both Generic and Templated source records (but is not recommended for Templated sources).
Exported Templated fields %SOUR._FIELD% etc, are unlikely to be recognised by other genealogy products.
They are usually all converted into a single Note %SOUR.NOTE%.
The Export Gedcom File plugin offers some other features such as always copying Templated Repository Fields into generic Repository %SOUR.REPO% fields.

[AdrianBruce]

Thanks, Adrian. Most of it makes sense.

So in other words, the simplest case for a published book is that TITL contains the title of the book. The simplest case for an unpublished document is that TITL contains some sort of description of the document that can be used to find it in the Archives' Catalogue.

However, your statement above contradicts CP’s help text referring to the Source Record Title: “This is the name by which that Source record is known within Family Historian (this record title should not to be confused with the title of a book or document, which the Source record may itself represent).”

That’s the major source of my confusion. Is the FH7 Title field the title of the record or the title of the source (i.e., book, journal entry, etc.)? If one makes up a descriptive title of a source, where is the actual title of tbe source documented?

That help text comes from the page on the Source Template Definition Editor. Therefore it's referring to templated source records only. And that is where the confusion arises, IMHO. I said above that

Templated Sources don't use the Short Title at all. ... They do use the (long) Title. However, the whole idea of Templated Sources (and please note I don't use them) is that they allow finer granularity. Hence, for an unpublished document, the researcher might split the description of the document (used to find it in the Archives' Catalogue) into several templated items. Those several items can be concatenated automatically into a defined format to create a single (long) Title, as well as the granular items. Yes, that's duplication but it allows a single item to contain a useful description. (Arguably you might think this is straying into Short Title territory???

Note the bit "you might think this is straying into Short Title territory".

If it's a chapter in a book, you might have templated items:

• Chapter Title;
• Book Title;
• Item of Interest...

This is part of the Advanced Collection's template for a Chapter in a Book. There are (at least) two parts to this title and they are separate in this template. That's where the (parts of the) actual title are recorded.

But alongside that in the Source Template Definition, you have the Record Title:
Record Title Format - Book: Chapter: {Author:REVERSE} - {Chapter_Title} - {Book_Title}

In essence, this usage of the Record Title is the full descriptive title of a source document, and the components of that title are documented in the templated items. It seems to me that this usage of Record Title (under Templated Sources) is, as I say, swinging close to the Short Title (of Generic Sources). This indicates that there is still a need for a Short Title even when Templates are used. And that's what the Help Text means:

“This is the name by which that Source record is known within Family Historian (this record title should not to be confused with the title of a book or document, which the Source record may itself represent).”

Can I attempt to summarise...?
Generic Sources
- Short Title is a name given to the source record in FH;
- (Long) Title is the title / description of the source document (one single item only);

Templated Sources
- Short Title is not used out of the box;
- (Long) Title is a name given to the source record in FH;
- Various templated items (potentially several) such as Book_Title, Chapter_Title, etc, contain the title / description of the source document;

Exported GEDCOMs
I'm saying nothing...

Hmmm

[tatewise]

Can I attempt to summarise...?
Generic Sources
- Short Title is a name given to the source record in FH; %SOUR.ABBR%
- (Long) Title is the title / description of the source document (one single item only); %SOUR.TITL%

Templated Sources
- Short Title is not used out of the box; %SOUR.ABBR%
- (Long) Title is a name given to the source record in FH; %SOUR.TITL%
- Various templated items (potentially several) such as Book_Title, Chapter_Title, etc, contain the title / description of the source document;

I've annotated that summary with GEDCOM/FH data references for those title fields, which seems to confuse things further:
Generic Sources name given to a source record is %SOUR.ABBR%
Templated Sources name given to a source record is %SOUR.TITL%
So the name given to a source record is in two different fields. No wonder some users are mystified.

[LornaCraig]

Well I have never found it confusing in the past, but I am confused by Adrian’s/Mike’s summary!

I have never thought of the (generic) Short Title as “the name given to the source record in FH”. I have always thought of the full Title as the name of the record and the Short title as simply as an abbreviated version of the full Title, which can be used for display purposes in the Records window and in the ‘Sources for’ pane attached to the Property Box. The display can be changed by the user, in Tools > Preferences > Records window. The name of the actual Source record in FH doesn’t change every time the user changes the display options!

I don’t use templated sources but as far as I am aware the same is true of them. The user can, if they wish, add a Short Title field to a template. The user can also choose whether to display the full Title or the Short Title.

I don’t see any fundamental difference in this respect between generic and templated sources.

[NickWalker]

Well I have never found it confusing in the past, but I am confused by Adrian’s/Mike’s summary!

I have never thought of the (generic) Short Title as “the name given to the source record in FH”. I have always thought of the full Title as the name of the record and the Short title as simply as an abbreviated version of the full Title, which can be used for display purposes in the Records window and in the ‘Sources for’ pane attached to the Property Box. The display can be changed by the user, in Tools > Preferences > Records window. The name of the actual Source record in FH doesn’t change every time the user changes the display options!

I don’t use templated sources but as far as I am aware the same is true of them. The user can, if they wish, add a Short Title field to a template. The user can also choose whether to display the full Title or the Short Title.

I don’t see any fundamental difference in this respect between generic and templated sources.

I totally agree with Lorna that I am baffled by the explanations above regarding a (Long) Title being the title of "a source document (one single item only)" but a short title being a title for the source record.

As Lorna said, a source can have a Title and/or a Short Title. The short title is optional (I never use it) but some people like to create an abbreviated source title that they can use in some circumstances as an alternative to the source title.

[AdrianBruce]

... I have never thought of the (generic) Short Title as “the name given to the source record in FH”. I have always thought of the full Title as the name of the record and the Short title as simply as an abbreviated version of the full Title, which can be used for display purposes in the Records window and in the ‘Sources for’ pane attached to the Property Box. ...

Perhaps strangely I thought you and I regarded the two titles in the same manner. The Short Title is an abbreviated, potentially reordered version of the main Title, used to navigate the lists.

... I don’t use templated sources but as far as I am aware the same is true of them. The user can, if they wish, add a Short Title field to a template. ...

Yes but it starts to get difficult because you're needing to reference something that's already there, rather than add a completely new item.

[AdrianBruce]

...
I totally agree with Lorna that I am baffled by the explanations above regarding a (Long) Title being the title of "a source document (one single item only)" but a short title being a title for the source record.

As Lorna said, a source can have a Title and/or a Short Title. The short title is optional (I never use it) but some people like to create an abbreviated source title that they can use in some circumstances as an alternative to the source title.

Yes, Short Titles are optional but I was trying to concoct an explanation why it might be useful to have that alternative - and identifying the source-record in an easily readable manner was the explanation in my GEDCOM head-canon.

For me - sample Short Title:

Probate: Familyname, GivenName, of Town, probate 2015

Corresponding (long) Title:

Grant of Probate dated 1 July 2015 for estate of GivenName FamilyName of Town

That's the way I write my (long) Titles - it's an "unpublished" document, so that's a description of the source-document. Since the name is several words in, the (long) Title isn't much good to identify the source-record in the lists, so I need an abbreviated form. I guess I could refer to it as an abbreviated Title and leave it as that - however, in my GEDCOM head-canon of explanations, I have it down as the identity of the Source Record - which happens to be the same explanation that CP use:

This is the name by which that Source record is known within Family Historian

It wouldn't be the first time that someone who wasn't previously confused, has become confused thanks to an explanation... Sorry!

[LornaCraig]

Perhaps strangely I thought you and I regarded the two titles in the same manner. The Short Title is an abbreviated, potentially reordered version of the main Title, used to navigate the lists.

Yes, we do agree on that. I just don’t think of the abbreviated version of the Title as being the ‘name’ of the record. The Title is the name, and the Short Title is an abbreviation of the name. As I said, the ‘name’ of the record doesn’t change if you switch the display options. All that changes is that the Short Title is displayed instead of the full Title.

I do agree that CP have caused confusion by saying "This is the name by which that Source record is known within Family Historian" when they should have said "This is the abbreviated name which can optionally be displayed in Family Historian instead of the full name".

Yes but it starts to get difficult because you're needing to reference something that's already there, rather than add a completely new item.

Sorry, I’m still baffled. A templated source can (optionally) have a Short Title just as a generic source can. In each case (in my head) the Title is the ‘name’ of the source record and the Short Title is an abbreviation of the ‘name’. So in this regard generic and templated sources are no different.

[BEJ]

Part of my confusion may be inconsistent use of terms. There are several titles under consideration.
1) Source Record Title.
2) Verbatum or descriptive title of the source record as found.
3) Short Title.

What I gather from recent comments is that if one wishes to have title #2 in a GEDCOM sympathetic format, then title #1 must include it. That applies to both generic and templated Source Record Titles.

[ColeValleyGirl]

I'm going to come back to my personal mantra: keep it simple and use it as designed.

For random example I have a Generic Source with:

Title: Youngstown, Ohio. "The Youngstown Daily Vindicator" 10 July 1902 (digital images), Google News (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid= ... =frontpage, accessed: 30 July 2019), page 5 column 2.

Short Title: Death 1902 Youngstown Ohio, William Staines, Newspaper Report


My Templated equivalent has:

Footnote: Youngstown, Ohio. "The Youngstown Daily Vindicator" 10 July 1902 (digital images), Google News (https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid= ... =frontpage, accessed: 30 July 2019), page 5 column 2.

(Source Record) Title: Death 1902 Youngstown Ohio, William Staines, Newspaper Report

Bibliography entry: "The Youngstown Daily Vindicator", 10 July 1902. https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid= ... =frontpage: 2019.

In both cases the actual source viewed is "The Youngstown Daily Vindicator" 10 July 1902, which is NOT included in the Short Title (for a Generic Source) or the Title (for a Templated Source), because I'm unlikely to remember the newspaper name when I want to find the corresponding source record within FH.

[AdrianBruce]

Yes but it starts to get difficult because you're needing to reference something that's already there, rather than add a completely new item.

Sorry, I’m still baffled. A templated source can (optionally) have a Short Title just as a generic source can. ...

My point is that adding a Short Title for a templated source is a level of difficulty more than many people are, I suggest, prepared to contemplate.

The Source Template Definition Editor has an item for "Record Title Format" (which is stored in TITL, i.e. the "long" Title), but the only other items that can be added easily to a Source Template Definition are template field codes - and Short Title isn't a template field code. In other words, the GEDCOM Short Title isn't easily accessible from the Source Template Definition Editor.

It is certainly possible to add an item into the Source Template Definition Editor, and map it to the GEDCOM Short Title but you have to be a bit more of a definitions Ninja than most people are. You can also add a Short Title to a Source Record via the All Tab - but again, this is Ninja level, I suggest.

So yes, a templated source can have a Short Title just as a generic source can, but I'm suggesting that for many people, that's impractical and therefore "irrelevant" to the discussion.

[ColeValleyGirl]

So yes, a templated source can have a Short Title just as a generic source can, but I'm suggesting that for many people, that's impractical and therefore "irrelevant" to the discussion.

Agreed. Impractical and unnecessary.

[LornaCraig]

So yes, a templated source can have a Short Title just as a generic source can, but I'm suggesting that for many people, that's impractical and therefore "irrelevant" to the discussion.

It may be impractical and (for some people) unnecessary but this whole discussion started because BEJ has added Short Titles to some of his templated sources, as shown in the screenshot in his second post, so I would say it is very relevant to this discussion!

Helen: Your usage makes perfect sense and I can see with this approach the templated source Title has the same content as the generic source Short Title.

But what would you say the ‘name’ of the source record is in each case? What I am questioning is Adrian’s/Mike’s assertion that for generic sources the ‘name’ in FH is what is held in %SOUR.ABBR% while for templated sources the ‘name’ is what is held in %SOUR.TITL%.

This suggests a difference which isn’t there. For me, the ‘name’ of the source record is in %SOUR.TITL% in both cases, and %SOUR.ABBR%, if present, is just an abbreviated/rearranged form of that name which can optionally be displayed.

However, as I said in a previous post,

I do agree that CP have caused confusion by saying "This is the name by which that Source record is known within Family Historian" when they should have said "This is the abbreviated name which can optionally be displayed in Family Historian instead of the full name".

[Mark1834]

Doesn't that demonstrate that there are many ways of achieving the same end result in FH when it comes to sources?

Taking Helen's example, I would have a Title similar to her Short Title (i.e. what the source is), no Short Title, and all the details of where such as date and weblink etc in the Publication Info field. That's also keeping it simple and "as designed" (the clue is in the field name ).

But that's no more right or wrong than Helen's version - we just offer alternatives for readers to try out and see what works for them.

So yes, existing FH6 users have three options for FH7 Templated Sources:

• Ignore them.
• Rework all your sources.
• Mix and match.

I can't think of a fourth option. Conversion is only viable if you are prepared to build your own custom plugin.

[ColeValleyGirl]

Taking Helen's example, I would have a Title similar to her Short Title (i.e. what the source is), no Short Title, and all the details of where such as date and weblink etc in the Publication Info field. That's also keeping it simple and "as designed" (the clue is in the field name ).

But that's no more right or wrong than Helen's version - we just offer alternatives for readers to try out and see what works for them.

It's hard to generate a (more-or-less) ESM-compliant footnote for a Generic Source using the options/fields available which is why I shove everything in the Title; the only other fields I populate are Generic Source Type and Short Title.

By 'use it as designed' I was thinking about Templated Sources, which seem to me to have been designed not to need a Short Title.

But what would you say the ‘name’ of the source record is in each case? What I am questioning is Adrian’s/Mike’s assertion that for generic sources the ‘name’ in FH is what is held in %SOUR.ABBR% while for templated sources the ‘name’ is what is held in %SOUR.TITL%.

This suggests a difference which isn’t there. For me, the ‘name’ of the source record is in %SOUR.TITL% in both cases, and %SOUR.ABBR%, if present, is just an abbreviated/rearranged form of that name which can optionally be displayed.

I agree with Lorna on this.

It may be impractical and (for some people) unnecessary but this whole discussion started because BEJ has added Short Titles to some of his templated sources, as shown in the screenshot in his second post, so I would say it is very relevant to this discussion!

To bring this back to BEJ's needs, it would be useful to know why they felt they had to introduce Short Title for Templated Sources. Then we can suggest what could be changed (if anything)/how much work would be involved.

[BEJ]

Conversion is only viable if you are prepared to build your own custom plugin.

Thanks for that Mark. I had posed the question about converting generic sources to templated ones earlier in this thread. Looks like I will continue to "mix and match" sources.

[AdrianBruce]

... It may be impractical and (for some people) unnecessary but this whole discussion started because BEJ has added Short Titles to some of his templated sources, as shown in the screenshot in his second post, so I would say it is very relevant to this discussion! ...

Ah. Yes. Point taken....

[LornaCraig]

To bring this back to BEJ's needs, it would be useful to know why they felt they had to introduce Short Title for Templated Sources. Then we can suggest what could be changed (if anything)/how much work would be involved.

I think it's because BEJ started using Short Titles with generic sources but is now also using templated sources and wants to carry on with broadly the same approcah with templated sources. In the last post on the first page of this topic BEJ said:

As shown in my previously posted screenshot, I prefer to display both Short Titles and Source Record Titles in my records window.....

My rationale for displaying both matches the reasons stated by LornaCraig. My Short Title naming convention mimics my file/media names, offering the “who,” “what,” “when,” and “where.” (Note that I modified the column layout of the screenshot for posting and do not normally display both titles side-by-side.) I simply copy the file/media name and paste it into the Short Title field to minimize errors, then add some punctuation not allowed in filenames. Short Titles let me know at a glance the focus individual, family or place, the timeframe, and the type of source.

[ColeValleyGirl]

So I'm confused -- in their very first posting they said 'I may need to re-do all my source titles.'

So is this still true or not?

[BEJ]

So is this still true or not?

When I get a few moments I’ll try to clarify. It may be couple of days.