XPost: soc.genealogy.computing, soc.genealogy.misc, alt.genealogy   
   XPost: soc.history   
   From: goddai01@hotmail.co.uk   
      
   On 21/03/17 11:25, J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:   
   > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:57:34 +0200, Steve Hayes   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:57:10 +0000, Ian Goddard   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> As a final comment I'd suggest that we should be treating this as   
   >>> *evidence*-based genealogy, not event-based.  For instance a single   
   >>> record which describes the baptism of John, the posthumous son of   
   >>> William Brown is evidence of 3 events, the birth and baptism of John and   
   >>> the death of William.   
   >>   
   >> It depends on your point of view.   
   >>   
   >> I am more interested in the events in the life of a person, than in   
   >> the documents that provide evidence of it.   
   >   
   > To me genealogy is name, date and place of birth, date and place of   
   > death and where buried. Everything else is family history. And most   
   > people, including me, include it. But I don't see family history as   
   > the prime reason for a genealogy program. There needs to be an option   
   > for those who do.   
      
   If you don't care for the evidence genealogy becomes absurdly easy.  You   
   can simply write your own to get back to Adam, Wodin or whoever takes   
   your fancy.   
      
   Evidence is where it starts and you need to keep track of that.  Card   
   indexes, software or whatever make it a good deal easier than keeping it   
   all in your head.   
      
   --   
   Hotmail is my spam bin.  Real address is ianng   
   at austonley org uk   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)