As I gather together photos I find it useful to record where I got the photo from. I have to record this by having the photo in different directories. It would be nice if the multi-media record allowed a source to be attached to it. Then it could be printed out in reports.
The Gedcom standard doesn't define a citation as one of the fields of a multi-media record. So if FH did implement this it would be break it's 100% adherence to Gedcom. So what, Gedcom is broken already since it hasn't been updated since ancient history. Gedcom is a data transfer protocol, not a database design document so breaking the 100% adherence to Gedcom is not a big deal.
Adding the source field to a multi-media record in the style of intent of Gedcom is still possible. The new definition would then be
MULTIMEDIA_LINK:=
[ /* embedded form*/
n OBJE @@ {1:1}
| /* linked form*/
nOBJE {1:1}
+1 FORM {1:1}
+1 TITL {0:1}
+1 FILE {1:1}
+1 > {0:M}
+1 > {0:M}
]
So what if other programs lose the citation. The important thing is that the user of FH can record the information they have.
ID:2172
* Sources for multi-media objects
-
ireneblackburn
- Superstar
- Posts: 289
- Joined: 07 Apr 2005 13:40
- Family Historian: V6
- Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Sources for multi-media objects
In Tools, Work with Multimedia, you can select each object and as well as the title you can add a date and note. Why not use that to record the source.
Irene B
Irene B
Sources for multi-media objects
It's a workaround, but a note field can be used to hold anything, and in my case it's about the contents of the photo, who is in it, where it was taken, etc.
Sources are good because they only occur once rather than many times. Though I could get round this with another workaround by creating a note record, linking it to the photo, then adding a source to the note. But then what's the point and what a palaver. It's long winded, doesn't produce any benefit since FH won't do anything with it, and because of that the source won't be easily identifible. You wouldn't be able to run a query on the multi-media received from a source.
To have a good genealogical record system it's nice to record everything properly and since everything in genealogy is sourced from something or other, even multi-media should come under this. They are pieces of information just like events and attributes.
Sources are good because they only occur once rather than many times. Though I could get round this with another workaround by creating a note record, linking it to the photo, then adding a source to the note. But then what's the point and what a palaver. It's long winded, doesn't produce any benefit since FH won't do anything with it, and because of that the source won't be easily identifible. You wouldn't be able to run a query on the multi-media received from a source.
To have a good genealogical record system it's nice to record everything properly and since everything in genealogy is sourced from something or other, even multi-media should come under this. They are pieces of information just like events and attributes.
-
ireneblackburn
- Superstar
- Posts: 289
- Joined: 07 Apr 2005 13:40
- Family Historian: V6
- Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Sources for multi-media objects
If you check 'Work with Multimedia Objects' you will see that the note is part of the header of each object along with title and date, if you double click on an item from the Multimedia pane it shows you the photo with its title, date and note. The note clearly belongs with the photo.
Irene
Irene
Sources for multi-media objects
I agree, the note is connected with the photo, and I use it to store information about the photo's contents. But the thing about this note is that it for that instance of the photo. If I use the photo more than once I've got to edit the note each time.
In the meantime I've decided to create another object for each photo and attach it as a multi-media record to the source record. I end up with two objects for each photo, and so long as I only record information about the photo in one place I don't duplicate any effort. Duplication in a database is a very bad thing which I remember well from my college days of database design and normalisations.
Which comes back to the whole point about my first message. It's a wishlist item for FH to support sources for multimedia in the future, not workarounds and long winded error prone processes.
In the meantime I've decided to create another object for each photo and attach it as a multi-media record to the source record. I end up with two objects for each photo, and so long as I only record information about the photo in one place I don't duplicate any effort. Duplication in a database is a very bad thing which I remember well from my college days of database design and normalisations.
Which comes back to the whole point about my first message. It's a wishlist item for FH to support sources for multimedia in the future, not workarounds and long winded error prone processes.