APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2004-01 > 1073133127


From: "Jerry Fitzpatrick" <>
Subject: [APG] RE: Name Registry?
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 06:32:07 -0600
In-Reply-To: <119.2d7d5226.2d278dab@aol.com>


Agreed. There is a conceptual difference between real people and
hypothetical people with respect to our reasoning process. Maybe, as you
suggest, the hypothetical ones should be highlighted in some way.

The more difficult problem is determining which person is which. If evidence
A and B seems applicable to Martha Drake #1 and evidence C and D seems
applicable to Martha Drake #2, which Martha Drake is real and which is
hypothetical? How do you decide? At what point does a hypothetical person
become real?

Our discussion is becoming pretty tangential to my name registry proposal,
but it's an interesting philosophical issue.

P.S. Maybe the term 'conjectural' would be more accurate than
'hypothetical', but whatever...

---
Jerry Fitzpatrick
Software Renovation Corporation

http://www.SoftwareRenovation.com


-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 9:15 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re: Name Registry?

Jerry:

You wrote
>
> Our disagreement is largely semantic, so maybe using different terms
would
> help. Consider there to be "real people" and "hypothetical people". Give
> each one (real or hypothetical) an identifier called "file number" so
that
> we can look them up in our files. Don't our differences fall by the
wayside?

I think the difference is actual, not just a matter of semantics, but
distinguishing between "real people" and "hypothetical people" effectively
makes the
distinction I consider essential--even if they are all numbered in the same
series for purposes of having a unique identifier.

"Real people" would be those individuals known to have lived, and hopefully
distinguished from other "real people" by having a known date and place of
birth and named parents not shared with anyone else bearing the same name
(although the possibility of such duplication can't be ruled out).

"Hypothetical people" would be named files in which we collect bits and
pieces of information associated with a name, but for which we don't yet
have
enough information to associate them with a real person. Using the
terminology of
the GENTECH Data Model, as I understand it, the hypothetical person file
would
hold a persona (an isolated fact or facts associated with a name), or a
group
of non-contradictory personas, each identified with its source, and
retrievable by name for possible later association with a "real person" when
sufficient
evidence accumulates to make that judgment.

I have no problem with giving hypothetical people unique file numbers in the

same series as real people, but perhaps the file numbers for the
hypotheticals
could be distinguished by a following asterisk or some other symbol
(analogous to Social Security's suffix "A" for active benefit recipients)
until such
time as their data can be associated with real people.

In use, whenever we get a new bit of information that we can definitely
associate with a real person, then we should go to each of our hypotheticals
of the
same name, to see if the new information, combined with what we already had,

gives us a good reason for now associating one or more of the hypothetical
person's information items with one of our real people.

Donn Devine, CG, CGI
Wilmington DE

CG, Certified Genealogist, CGI, and Certified Genealogical Instructor are
service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under
license
by board certificants after periodic evaluation, and the board name is
registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office.
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus Scanner]



This thread: