It’s made in Gimp, so there’s no code behind the image. A click on the “arrow” icon would open the source (in preferred browser).
For GEDCOM export 5.5 I believe the data would go into the “Volume/Page” tag as a key:value pair. For GEDCOM 7 I believe there is a URL tag. For Gramps I guess it should be stored in the citation object.
We already have an Internet tab for other object types.
It seems like it would be better to not have a different interface for the same functionality. Plus, the ability to have multiple URLs for a citation would be useful.
(It would be nice if it handled PDF [local URI and remote URL] with page/indexing support.)
It should absolutely not be an extra tab to the source citation editor, but a new field as shown in the image.
Whether it’s called “Web address” or “Link/URL” I don’t mind, as long as it’s usage is intuitive.
I don’t like the text button, when the rest of the layout uses graphic icons.
There could an alternative data-entry citation “view” that gives direct access to more fields, including a primary/preferred link. But the built-in view should conform the common interface with a tab.
Having a URL is atypical of standard citation formats. Particularly since Internet-based sources are generally considered low-confidence and ephemeral. Yet having a field implies that every citation is expected to have one. That sends mixed messages.
Here’s what works well for me: I attach a Note to the citation, put the URL in the Note, and it appears (and is clickable) in the endnotes that Gramps adds to reports.
I total support the proposal as described. I can’t think that I have ever recorded multiple URL for a citation. The same citation could be found at different sites, but I would not record that as I don’t enter duplicates.
I upload to WikiTree and using a note is a non-starter because notes are handle as separate items and not linked to a citation.
The URL currently must be as part of the vol/page to remain part of the citation. I assume at some point that WikiTree would handle the gedcom7 tag.
Currently I append the URL to the end of the vol/page field.
I’ve moved to just using attributes as the actual sources (First Note, Subsequent Note, and Bibliography Note attributes) and a short descriptive note in the “Volume/Page” field so that I can tell what is what quickly in the Source view. It makes an ABSOLUTE MESS out of the canned reports though.
I’m not sure how to make the actual source window flexible enough to handle all citation formats. Because, lets be honest, for many hobby genealogists, especially in the US, most of us are now using online records. But that may not be true for many in other areas of the world that have more local access to archives. Other than straight up making a overpowered (e.g., add a date button, different section for each type of note, etc) Notes window.
I do wish that the attributes popup was more like the notes popup. Like, 1 little text box, with all of that unused space is frustrating. (the one little text box in the source window falls to this as well).
They really probably are not, and I’ll probably have to write my own report to make use of them, but given how anemic/book-focused the sourcing is in Gramps, I haven’t thought of a better way; although I am always open to ideas and cool things others have done!
I cite using the EE model which has 3 types of sources as listed above, which aligns with Chicago and several other citation models. Even if I was using MLA or APA, they require 2, how to do that without attributes? I guess I could put it in separate notes, and give them a different note type, but that seemed messier than attributes.
I did start with putting the whole citation in the volume, but it was a pain to write and edit. I have to write it elsewhere and paste it in, and it doesn’t retain proper formatting, like italics.
And it makes a mess to try and read. While I can manage right now with how small my database is, when it grows knowing which citation I’m looking at at a glance will be a pain with this setup:
Much easier to stick it in an attribute and use the Page/Vol for this:
And while the first one certainly got me closer to what I would consider correct citations on canned reports, it still wasn’t correct enough that I wouldn’t have to hand edit. Might as well make it easier for me in program, since I’m editing reports either way.
Again, given how varied everyone sources things, I think a robust free form text input with some bells and whistles might be something to consider.
I put some specfics into the vol/page field like the film number or other reference info which can be used to locate the citation if needed.
In a many of them I copy the transcribed citation into a note of the citation.
The URL is appeared to the end of vol/page field.
These all come out well in reports and conform to gedcom exports. Be aware that the attributes in the citation is not included in an export.
