<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Errors in Standardized Names on new FamilySearch</title>
	<atom:link href="http://peterfh.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/errors-in-standardized-names-on-new-familysearch/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://peterfh.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/errors-in-standardized-names-on-new-familysearch/</link>
	<description>for FH Consultants and anyone else interested in Family History in the northern part of the N Amer Central Area</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2012 00:59:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: sherry blake</title>
		<link>http://peterfh.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/errors-in-standardized-names-on-new-familysearch/#comment-82</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[sherry blake]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:51:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterfh.wordpress.com/?p=217#comment-82</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I remember a similar problem, but I thought that it must correct and that the county had a division #! I wonder how this gets corrected after already adopting this standardized version?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I remember a similar problem, but I thought that it must correct and that the county had a division #! I wonder how this gets corrected after already adopting this standardized version?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pdarby</title>
		<link>http://peterfh.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/errors-in-standardized-names-on-new-familysearch/#comment-79</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pdarby]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:30:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterfh.wordpress.com/?p=217#comment-79</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So the June change was an improvement in Canadian place names? 
. . . So the engineers are teaching us something about our place names - and Calgary as a place should include a division?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So the June change was an improvement in Canadian place names?<br />
. . . So the engineers are teaching us something about our place names &#8211; and Calgary as a place should include a division?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sue</title>
		<link>http://peterfh.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/errors-in-standardized-names-on-new-familysearch/#comment-78</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sue]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 15:43:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterfh.wordpress.com/?p=217#comment-78</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Using Division in place names in Alberta is not new or wrong. Having gone back and forward to Lethbridge a number of times in the last couple of weeks I have noticed on sign posts the following. M.D. Place Name. M.D. stands for Municipal Division of....When NFS engineers used this they went out of their way to find the Divisions for each of the areas of the Provinces. Do not be so hard on these guys (and let me tell you I am one of their biggest critics), Divisions etc are there and have been used, check the census records as well.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Using Division in place names in Alberta is not new or wrong. Having gone back and forward to Lethbridge a number of times in the last couple of weeks I have noticed on sign posts the following. M.D. Place Name. M.D. stands for Municipal Division of&#8230;.When NFS engineers used this they went out of their way to find the Divisions for each of the areas of the Provinces. Do not be so hard on these guys (and let me tell you I am one of their biggest critics), Divisions etc are there and have been used, check the census records as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Deanna</title>
		<link>http://peterfh.wordpress.com/2010/07/25/errors-in-standardized-names-on-new-familysearch/#comment-77</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Deanna]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 15:35:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterfh.wordpress.com/?p=217#comment-77</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wow this is a curious system problem.  Place names are very emotion laden.  Being told as a current band-aid to pick the closest standardized name to the actual place is like denying in some small way the validity of the actual event taking place.

It is hard for me to believe that if I type in Taber, Alberta, Canada and the system overrides it with Taber, Division No. 2, Alberta, Canada.  That somewhere deep within the software it really knows that I want Taber, Alberta, Canada which is how I read the following quote by Ron Tanner

  &quot; Now you can enter a place and it will pop-up with suggestions from the database, but if there are none you believe are close enough to select so you don&#039;t have to keep typing, then just don&#039;t select any from the drop-down. Then the system will attempt to match what you entered and fill in the standardized version of the place. If you don&#039;t believe the standardized place is close enough, then click on the arrow next to the standardized place and pick the closest one. By doing this we keep your original place data but also have the closest standardized place&quot;


However, throughout all of this it is reassuring to know that feedback is taken seriously and the programmers on the nFS team are working hard to make this software as perfect as possibly for all of our needs.  What was that saying about Patience being a Virture?

Regards,
Deanna]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow this is a curious system problem.  Place names are very emotion laden.  Being told as a current band-aid to pick the closest standardized name to the actual place is like denying in some small way the validity of the actual event taking place.</p>
<p>It is hard for me to believe that if I type in Taber, Alberta, Canada and the system overrides it with Taber, Division No. 2, Alberta, Canada.  That somewhere deep within the software it really knows that I want Taber, Alberta, Canada which is how I read the following quote by Ron Tanner</p>
<p>  &#8221; Now you can enter a place and it will pop-up with suggestions from the database, but if there are none you believe are close enough to select so you don&#8217;t have to keep typing, then just don&#8217;t select any from the drop-down. Then the system will attempt to match what you entered and fill in the standardized version of the place. If you don&#8217;t believe the standardized place is close enough, then click on the arrow next to the standardized place and pick the closest one. By doing this we keep your original place data but also have the closest standardized place&#8221;</p>
<p>However, throughout all of this it is reassuring to know that feedback is taken seriously and the programmers on the nFS team are working hard to make this software as perfect as possibly for all of our needs.  What was that saying about Patience being a Virture?</p>
<p>Regards,<br />
Deanna</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
