Standardizing event places
Here is a visual demonstration of why it is not sufficient to leave place names standardized half way, with the default or guessed standard applied by FamilySearch but not confirmed manually by a contributor.
Image 1 is a "standardized" birthplace name where the standard is a guess applied by FamilySearch, viewed in the editor.
Image 2 is the unedited birthplace in the Details view.
Image 3 is the profile returned in Find result. Note that the birthplace not Germany, it is Irregular.
Answers
-
Very interesting find here. There has always been a bit of conflict in the various routine in Family Tree of which place name field to use or display, the Display or the Standardized version. But I think there are deeper problems here that are associated with the current serious problem that the Search and Find routines have of making up place names. I was checking out your discovery that the filters appear to use the Display name instead of the Standardized name when they really should use both and found this:
Here the summary card displays the Display place name. The Detail Page editing box for christening shows both the Display place name and the Standardized place name. The Find result page has a third name. If you type in "heubach,jagstkreis, wuerttemberg" in the Places database, you get a fourth name, Jagstkreis, Württemberg, German Empire.
So there are a couple of bugs here that need to be fixed:
1) The Find routine is ignoring the standard linked to a place name.
2) The Find routine is picking its own standard for the place name.
3) Sometimes the Find routine results list displays the Display place name (as in the top result of the two shown in the background) and sometimes it shows its own created-on-the-fly Standardized place name (as in the bottom result above.
I would wonder if part of the trouble here is that they decided to use the Display name to try to ensure that the routine did not leave out all the non-standardized place names (those marked with big red letters "Non-Standard Place Name") in the results. It seems that it should be possible to include both versions of the place name in the results in the same way that all Alternate Names are used when searching. Also, it seems it should be possible to include both place names in the filters if the they would fall under different filters.
1 -
To completely blow your mind, add the Family Tree mobile app to the mix. It has still more differences wrt place names.
Is this all a case of battling engineering teams trying different solutions?
1
