FamilySearch Wiki:Technical Meeting Agenda 11 January 2011
Join the meeting, the ID is 7780
Add your recognition items below
- Kudos go to ...
The team pulling off converting to new FamilySearch Library Catalog, but with unintentional results. See comments below. Dsammy 20:03, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
News items can now be found on the Community News page in the Wiki.
From the Community
- Script change and FHL Template problem
After the script run was done, two interesting results turned up. No one could have forseen this with the way the new FHL Catalog is. Dsammy 20:17, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
1. FHL|Vermont,+Addison|subject|disp=Family History Library Catalog will result with records pertaining to Addison County PLUS (emphasized on plus) all records pertaining only to the towns, villages, etc within Addison County, Vermont. (commented on this to Don Stringham: in case of Addison County, Vermont, it dragged in a net: Addison, Bridgport, Bristol, Cornwall, Ferrisburg, Goshen, Granville, Hancock, Leicester Lincoln, Middlebury, Monkton, New Haven, Orwell, Panton, Ripton, Salisbury, Shoreham, Starksboro, Vergennes, Waltham, Weybridge, Whiting)
2. A turnabout - the same template, if used for Town of Addison, will drag in all records pertaining to Addison County PLUS all the records pertaining to other towns and villages in the same county. This is not what we want. This is the consequence we did not think of.
3. Reflecting upon above template, there are additional problems. How do we separate counties and cities/towns? Specificially:
- City of Boise (Idaho) vs Boise County, Idaho (Boise City is NOT in Boise County but in Ada County)
- City of Albany, New York vs Albany County, New York
- City of Baker City (listed as Baker in catalog), vs Baker County, Oregon
- Towns of Washington vs any Washington County in any state.
Another string failed (towns in this county has same problem: FHL|South+Carolina%2C+Aiken%2C+Bath|subject|disp=Bath failed, not clickable
From FamilySearch Staff