Enhancement to Add Birth Event in 1841 Census.

tLeodiensian · Post by **tLeodiensian** » 25 Aug 2007 15:15

Hi Nick,

Could you consider making it an option to create a 'between' date format for people aged 15 and over to cover the rounding down of ages to the nearest 5 years the 1841 census ? If I am trying to be lazy and let GC create the birth events, it makes for a bunch of manual edits afterwards as I change the birth date from the single year (for example) for someone with a recorded (and rounded) age of 45 to 'btw 1791 and 1796' .

doug

P.S. Keep on with the good work.[smile]

ID:2473

Post by **NickWalker** » 25 Aug 2007 17:44

I'll add it to the 'to do list'. I think it would need to be an option for each birth though as I find a surprising number of 1841 census entries have a non-rounded age for those over 15 too.

Cheers

Nick

tLeodiensian · Post by **tLeodiensian** » 25 Aug 2007 21:42

I've noticed the same, however, could you get clever and only do the 'between' thing if the age is only 15, 20, 25 etc. ?

i.e. if the age is entered as 47, then it can't have ben rounded, so the option, even if set, could be bypassed.

doug

Post by **NickWalker** » 27 Aug 2007 10:37

Yes I thought of that, but of course if there were a number of people in the entry, some of whom were recorded with exact ages then those with ages divisible by 5 could be considered to be exact ages too!

ChrisBowyer · Post by **ChrisBowyer** » 30 Aug 2007 05:45

Just to throw a spanner in... Not everyone in 1841 quite understood the idea of rounding. we have several examples of adult ages not divisible by 5 that have simply had 5 subtracted.

And I just wrote a reply to another post about problems with 'between', 'before' and 'after' dates in the context of Genes Reunited... We find it generally more useful to always record an approximate year of birth with source citations to justify it.

Family Historian User Group