[APG Public List] [APG Members] place names

[LBoswell]

by suggesting it would be a topic for sourcecitations I may have given the 
wrong impression.  I'm referring to footnoting the location.

But that said, I'd not have a problem with including it as a note appended 
to a citation, given it would clarify location referenced by the citation. 
But what I was thinking of is tagging named locations mentioned in research 
with their real world coordinates (specific or general coordinates)

But I wonder too if how we cite things is going to change given digital 
realities.  I've argued before that digital access has substantially altered 
such things, and raised new options/potentials (as well as new problems) 
that aren't being fully addressed (my opinion).  But that latter bit would 
be better talked about on a list dedicated to such things.

Larry
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: eshown at comcast.net
  To: apgpubliclist at apgen.org
  Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 10:25 PM
  Subject: Re: [APG Public List] [APG Members] place names


  With regard to identifying places by GPS, Larry wrote:
  >Maybe this is a more appropriate topic for the rather silent 
SourcCitations
  list, because really it's an issue (historical/modern names) that's
  encountered more often in that area.

  John then responded:
  >I think the caution of using them can be addressed in the description
  (citation detail?) of what the site is. ... can be annotated as "Grave 
Site
  of..." etc.

  John and Larry, I can understand the placement of GPS data in a source
  citation when one is citing the location of a gravestone in a
  cemetery---especially obscure rural cemeteries and large urban ones. But 
in
  the usual discussion of locations, if and when we use GPS coordinates as a
  means of pinpointing rural locales or events (such as Michael's proposed
  case of birth on a farm), it would seem to me that the information should
  not be relegated to source citations. After all, a GPS location is not a
  source. The birth or other event is not a source. The GPS would be 
relevant
  to the source only if we were giving the coordinates for the location of 
the
  *repository* (that being the sense in which we use GPS coordinates in a
  cemetery citation).

  We typically identify locations of events and residences in our narrative,
  no? There, we give the legal descriptions of farms, we state the street 
and
  lot numbers for town residences, and we say that country stores were at a
  certain crossroad. If we know the precise GPS location for that farm or
  residence or country store, why bury the property's GPS location in a 
source
  note that many people don't bother reading?  Why not give it 
parenthetically
  in the text, as we might do with any other "current location" for a 
historic
  place whose name has changed?

  Elizabeth

  ----------------------------------------------------------
  Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG
  Tennessee


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <../attachments/20101026/114f381a/attachment.htm>