Improve Help for Transcribers Pages - relationships

[edickens]

Michael Clarke wrote:-

There seems to be a lot of confusion within the Transcribers group regarding various fields, especially with the restrictions of WinREG.

I am thinking especially of Relationship. In my mind "servant of", servant to", "apprentice to" etc. are also relationships, although not familial. Also "gramdfather", "grandson", "uncle", "brother-in-law", "son-in-law", "stepson" etc are all familial relationships. None of these are in standard WinREG but can be added.

Maybe FreeREG Help needs to state that these are ALL valid relationships for Flexible CSV use.

It might also be of use to state which fields are indexed, and thus searchable, and those which are just informational (eq Abode, Notes, Occupation, Relationship etc/).

I personally have a rule that EVERY name in a register entry gets transcribed into a searchable field, even if this requires several transcribed records (thinking of witnesses) to do this. The names ARE important and should not be hidden only in Notes.

[edickens]

This seems a very reasonable request. There has been a lot of traffic in the Transcribers Mailgroup these last few days on this subject as there is some confusion.

So the Felxible CSV fields need to be marked in the Help:-

• This field is Indexed
  It is searchable.
• This field is validated
  For exampe Age must conform to a format as specified
• This field is for information only
  Free format

I could mark up some of the fields but Vino would need to say which are searchable.

[PatReynolds]

Maybe the last one should be "This field is shown to researchers, but is not indexed, and cannot be searched"
Also need to add "This field is not validated"

[PatReynolds]

We only index searchable fields.

@edickens to let transcribers and coordinators know where a picklist is just to make it easier to transcribe, not used prescriptively.

@Irene-ene to add to UniTT project definition document