Re: Reference a section of place


Edward Sneithe
 

If I read the GECOM 5.5.1 and the new 7.0.0 it seems that the place should contain a location like city, county, state, country. The address field should contain the entire address, multi line address as it would appear on a mailing so I assume that would be street address, city, county, state, country, zip code

Gedcom 5.5.1 page 58 says place:

"This shows the jurisdictional entities that are named in a sequence from the lowest to the highest
jurisdiction. The jurisdictions are separated by commas, and any jurisdiction's name that is missing is
still accounted for by a comma."

The same standard says this about Address:

ADDRESS_STRUCTURE:=
n ADDR <ADDRESS_LINE> {1:1} p.41
+1 CONT <ADDRESS_LINE> {0:3} p.41
+1 ADR1 <ADDRESS_LINE1> {0:1} p.41
+1 ADR2 <ADDRESS_LINE2> {0:1} p.41
+1 ADR3 <ADDRESS_LINE3> {0:1} p.41
+1 CITY <ADDRESS_CITY> {0:1} p.41
+1 STAE <ADDRESS_STATE> {0:1} p.42
+1 POST <ADDRESS_POSTAL_CODE> {0:1} p.41
+1 CTRY <ADDRESS_COUNTRY> {0:1} p.41

"The address structure should be formed as it would appear on a mailing label using the ADDR and
the CONT lines to form the address structure."


 in 5.5.1 the place field is described like this on page 65:

"A comma-separated list of jurisdictional titles, which has the same number of
elements and in the same order as the PLAC structure. Entries should be in an
order where each is typically subsumed by the next.
Example — The following represents Baltimore, a city that is not within a
county.

2 PLAC Baltimore, , Maryland, USA
3 FORM City, County, State, Country"


From page 37 of the new 7.0.0 GEDCOM Standard an address is:

"A specific building, plot, or location. The payload is the full formatted address
as it would appear on a mailing label, including appropriate line breaks (encoded
using CONT (p.60) tags). The expected order of address components varies
by region; the address should be organized as expected by the addressed region."

It does not reference the person etc. at that location or naming. If I follow that standard then from my example I would have :

Place: East Hampton, Connecticut

and the address:

St Patrick,
47 West High St,
East Hampton, Connecticut, USA

including all the line breaks. If I follow this standard then the geocoding will not get the exact location but just the city location. The exact location is in the Address field. If I use this model then the geocoding is very general but the location can be dragged to the correct position thus manually making up for the lack of a street address in the place field. But that also has the drawback of not allowing for multiple locations in the same city.

It looks like the only solution for geocoding is to include the street address in the place field and extracting the components with FH functions.

I have also tried the use of labelled text in the note field, surrounded by privacy symbols like:

[[
Church: St Patricks
]]

and then in a sentence extracting the various components using FH functions.

If we are to follow the GEDCOM standard then it appears that the geocoding would be better placed on the address field rather than the Place field. It would be nice if FH gave us an option to select either or both to use  in geocoding so that 99.99% of my place fields only have City, County, State, Country and the address field has the specific street  address. 

A lot to contemplate. FH does have a way to adjust for any of these scenarios except for geocoding.

Should something like this be better defined and go on a wish list?

I hope I have not confused anyone.

On Monday, August 16, 2021, 05:57:26 AM EDT, <j.van.beek@...> wrote:


FH (especially with help of the numerous plugins) offers indeed a multitude of ways to implement users ideas, wishes etc.

For me this means that I've to ask myself why would I want what?". My answers to that question for the Place considerations are:
1. Places are about two things: naming and location on earth. The naming may change over time while the location stays the same. This is neatly solved in FH by using the standardized name and using the geo-location of that name. Sometimes we have Places with the same name but at a different location. Here also the standardized name and the (in this case different) geo-location help us out. In this case it's usually wise to add extra information to the name (e.g. county, province etc.) to set the names visually apart.
2. To not clutter up the narratives, I want the names to be as short as possible. So, no extensive use of state, county, province, country etc. info if, from the context of the narrative, it's obvious where the Place is expected to be located. And, due to point 1 there's always an exact reference to the location on earth.
3. Sometimes interesting information about the Place is available (e.g. the name of the hospital where a child was born, the name of a graveyard, the name of a church where people married etc. etc.). I'd like to add that in to the "Place name" to make it easily accessible within FH (see my solution for this in my former post).

For what it's worth: up until now the above approach has served me well with thousands of Places in The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, France, the UK, the USA and a few other countries. :)

Join family-historian@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.