At the moment, we are working on entering "Document Types" into the database. This is a hybrid part of the project where we are working both with the slips and interface. See images below. We have completed JA's document types and are working now on JQA. I skipped AA as I couldn't find her slips.
At the same time, the good people in the Adams papers are doing preliminary work on cleaning up the names database. This involved printing out the entire list of names and looking particularly at the Adamses, Smiths, etc. for duplicates and then seeing which can be merged or which can be better identified. Of course our by now classic example is Thomas Baker Johnson who had at least three entries (johnson-t-b; johnson-thomas-b; and johnson-thomas-baker). They have all been fixed in that the attributes are all "johnson-thomas-baker" now. For now, "Johnson, T. B." and "Johnson, Thomas B." still appear in the drop down list of names when searching slips as these forms of his name do appear on the physical slips. However if one were to select these options they would get a return of 0 results. Perhaps it will be worth it to remove them altogether?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I want to suggest you an alternate not sure if it will be feasible for you.While merging you should keep in database the id of person it is merged to.So when the searching is done and result is 0 then it should give them a hint of the merged record and tell them that they should now look into the new name(merged one).
ReplyDeletewhat is a digital signature