[Babase] AMOK Questions
Jeanne Altmann
altj at Princeton.EDU
Sat Aug 2 14:37:08 EDT 2008
Hi all,
Did not follow closely while away, so here's my thought in prep for
Thurs' conf. call:
1. This could be considered a variant on the situation in which we
assigned some maternity situations when we first started with a group
(e.g. Spot as Alto's daughter), or the assignments we did with kids born
during the bad coverage period in the early 90's when the newly
fissioned groups were in TZ, though the question of 2 lines does not
arise in those.
2. I favor a single line, probably with the AMO name, the name decision
being based on our probably having close to zero information under the
name of BIL and so we presumably could track down all uses of BIL. If
this assumption is false, I would reconsider. [The two times Daphne had
to track down all uses of a name that turned out to be bad, it was a
huge job and one that is impossible to feel confident in.]
3. I favor the alias table, while acknowledging the concern about tables
that just are basically 'burial places for odd information'. Would a
couple of demog notes be better? Same for the cases I mention above
4. I agree that these presumably rare cases should be dealt with
individually. I am concerned about instances in which a reasonable
amount of data exist under each name (see 2. above). How do we handle
that?
5. If we do consider BIL=AMO, and I agree that we do, I think that in
this case, even maternal parity & rank for AMO should be that for BIL as
we had enough demographic coverage of Lodge group during that period to
do so.
6. With a single line for AMO=BIL, will we run into problems with the
gap in his early maturational marker data? Matdate? Disperse date? Or
are we ok because, as Karl notes, rules are less rigid for males and
also we now have the matured by and such options?
jeanne
-----Original Message-----
From: babase-bounces at eeblistserv.princeton.edu
[mailto:babase-bounces at eeblistserv.princeton.edu] On Behalf Of Karl O.
Pinc
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 7:29 PM
To: The Baboon Database Project
Subject: Re: [Babase] AMOK Questions
On 07/14/2008 05:11:21 PM, Susan Alberts wrote:
> GIven that we are sort of waffly on the "sure" part, I like Karl's
> suggestion:
>
>>> ......
>
>>> I could see a table called something like
>> ALTERNATE_SNAMES. It'd have, say, 5 rows:
>> That way when you've got data outside Babase with the "bad" sname in
>> it you can still work with the data and link it to the "good"
>> sname.
A table like this (or call it nicknames? aliases?
sobriquets?) can be used
either way you decide the question of whether or not to have a single
row for AMO & BIL. (And you don't have to make the same decision in the
future regarding another immigrant male as you do with AMO/BIL.)
So anyway, you've got options. No doubt enough to give your self enough
rope to hang yourself with, but that's life. :-)
Karl <kop at meme.com>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
_______________________________________________
Babase mailing list
Babase at www.eco.princeton.edu
http://www.eco.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/babase
More information about the Babase
mailing list