With regard to adapting First Reference Note "2", in Sec. 11.40 (Pension Files), p.604, EE 3rd ed. (c) 2015:
I'd like to ask for a bit of clarification for the reasons explained below.
The record package with which I am working addresses a single person over the course of his involvement in two military engagements; WWII and his subsequent regular Canadian airforce military service. As such he also has a separate service ID for each. As his service spans more than 20 years, he also has held various ranks in both engagements.
[The material was provided as a package under a "Request Number" and contains selected images from a specific "Jacket Number". The archivist determines the "Jacket Number" from an internal index using the person's name and most recent "Service Id". Having discussed this with the archivist, the index also appears to cross-index to other "Service Ids" the person may have held. It appears that the rank, service and military engagements are not actually used to access the correct "Jacket". While not yet digitized and online, I am told that the "Jacket Number" is also the likely grouping that will be used. This may have a bearing on how one cites the records for future relocation.]
I will be referencing individual documents within the package to support my discussion of the military service.
It appears that the semicolons divide the package of information, from which the "Deposition of Claimant" was extracted, into a hierarchy (so I assume the intent is to form a "layered citation").
Could you confirm whether I've understood the purpose of the clauses in the hierarchy and respond to the question on clause #2?
Clause #1 appears to be an identification of the specific record in the package.
Clause #2 appears to be an identification of the entire physical package from which the "Deposition of Claimant" was extracted. Why does the parenthetical note state a specific rank, company and engagement when the person may have several within the package? Would that type of detail not belong in clause #1? On that item, the military individual would have a specific rank, company and engagement.
Clause #3 appears to be an identification of the collection from which the package was taken.
Clause #4 appears to be an identification of the parent grouping from which the collection was taken.
Clause #5 appears to be an identification of the repository holding the source.