Data Conventions - Dates [Resolved]

[Pejic]

I'm with KGarrad, of course if nostrodamus had predicted what GedCom standards were to be then, I would have known how to present my dates in 1960,and the registrars would have known in 1840 and the parish priests would have known in 1750.  And anyway GEDCOM does not allow the popularly used 1751/2 type years for the period when the calendar changed (as pointed out in an earlier post).

[Sloe Gin]

The only other point to mention, is that before an event is entered you must have and accept that record however improbable it may seem, until such time as you find better evidence. The notes is the place to write why you think a date ot other event is not what is recorded.

I don't understand what you mean by this.

[GrahamSimons]

And anyway GEDCOM does not allow the popularly used 1751/2 type years for the period when the calendar changed (as pointed out in an earlier post).

From the GEDCOM standard mentioned in my earlier post:
DATE_CALENDAR_ESCAPE: = {Size=4:15}
[ @#DHEBREW@ | @#DROMAN@ | @#DFRENCH R@ | @#DGREGORIAN@ |
@#DJULIAN@ | @#DUNKNOWN@ ]
The date escape determines the date interpretation by signifying which <DATE_CALENDAR> to use. The default calendar is the Gregorian calendar.

[Guy Etchells]

My guess is that the various software packages have used the GEDCOM standards as their starting point; after all they need to be able to export and import data as GEDCOM in order to exchange information.

Well done Graham, you have found exactly what I was looking for and this outlines things very clearly. There is definitely a standard to abide by, what has surprised me with some of the responses here, is statements like, "Do whatever suits you" or words similar to that effect, this can only amount to "Genealogical anarchy".

The only other point to mention, is that before an event is entered you must have and accept that record however improbable it may seem, until such time as you find better evidence. The notes is the place to write why you think a date ot other event is not what is recorded.

I am now happy to mark this thread [Resolved].

Robert…

Genealogical Anaarchy is when program makers dictate to genealogists and family historians how they have to record information.
Genealogical information has been recorded for generations before computers were ever thought of and will be recorded generations after comuters have been consigned to the technological scrap heap.
Even as we write these exchanges gedcom is out of date and is being sidelined by more and more porgrams.
Cheers
Guy

[jc26red]

Agree with Guy, Sloe and the others...
Surely the important thing is to make sure you have a source and/note against each date event? 
Adding an event without even a date is well.... asking for trouble!  By all means add a personal note against the person  as a reminder or add a "to do" for verification but adding the event without any source or note is more worrying than being concerned over convention standards in my book. Whener you use abt/bef/aft/circa is your choice. Personally I use ones my software doesn't chuck back at me in bold red! 

How you write it is your choice, true many FH software programs try to dictate how we write the date but so long as you know your format and the person you send it to knows it, why should it matter to anyone else?  As well as my FH program,  I still keep a copy on excel with masses of notes! which I often refer back to as it contains lots of my check points and sources. Its a bit messy but its readable and also correct. It says more about me as the family historian if its a bit quirky 

Jenny

[Pejic]

To GrahamSimons:

Thank you for this information.

In the past Gregorian has been presented as YYDDD.  The 1751/2 convention is from when years began to start on 1st January instead of 1st April and covers the time when UK changed from Gregorian to Julian, so having one date escape for the whole tree would not be a solution, and having to specify the format of each date individually would be more than tiresome.

[rancegal]

  In the old calendar, the year started on 26 March (not April 1).

    WinReg, the program used for FreeReg transcribing makes you put eg 1750/1751.


    I think the OP was labouring under the misapprehension that Rootschatters are profressional genealogists!

[stanmapstone]

To GrahamSimons:

 when UK changed from Gregorian to Julian,

  In the old calendar, the year started on 26 March (not April 1).

   

Calendar changes for England and Wales
                                       
The last Julian calendar day was 2 September 1752 the first Gregorian calendar day was 14 September 1752
(the days between these dates were omitted)                                     
Between approx 1200 and 1752 the year started on 25th March, from 1752 every year started on 1st January

Stan

[Pejic]

I am sure I have seen dual years quoted on many years other than 1751/2 - presumably that new New Years Day did not quickly enter the heads of all recorders.