An email forum for researchers currently carries a thread on citing long URLs vs. digital paths (aka “waypoints”). One commenter saw an advantage: If we cite the path, then we can eliminate layered citations.
Can we really?
Two examples below, from Evidence Explained, 3d edition revised, illustrate citing both layers and paths. In each, coloration is used to distinguish between the layers of the citation
EE 5.19 First Reference Note
1. Genealogical Committee, LDS Church, “Cemetery Records: Yountville, Napa, California,” MS (Salt Lake City: Filmed by the Genealogical Society, 1956), unnumbered p. 2, Mary Francis Boggs (1851–1856); imaged as “California, Cemetery Transcriptions, 1850–1960,” FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org : accessed 1 April 2015), path: Napa, Yountville > Yountville Cemetery, image 3.
EE 7.18 First Reference Note
1. St. Liborious Church (St. Libory, Illinois), “Liber Baptismalis ab anno 1849 die 30 Murt. usque ad initium anni 1863,” unnumbered pages, unnumbered entries in chronological order, “Elisabetham Aberle” baptism, 12 November 1857; accessed as “Illinois, Diocese of Belleville, Catholic Parish Records, 1729–1956,” browsable images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1388122 : 1 April 2015), path: St. Clair County > St. Libory > St. Liborious > 1849–1862 Baptisms, First Communion, Confirmations > image 33 of 68.
Would you feel comfortable eliminating the first layer and just citing the website and the path to the image? Would you understand the source as well, from just the path citation?
HOW TO CITE: Elizabeth Shown Mills, "Citing Layers vs. Paths: Is It Really an Either–Or Choice?," blog post, QuickTips: The Blog @ Evidence Explained (https://www.evidenceexplained.org/quicktips/citing-layers-vs-paths-is-it-really-an-either-or-choice : posted 28 September 2018).
I have experienced a couple…
I have experienced a couple of instances where the collections on FamilySearch were changed/updated and I could no longer find the image through the cited collection and path. Per the help desk, the collections are made up of various DGS images / FHL film . The collections may be reorganized or expanded as more images are digitized. As a result, I now try to cite directly to the image in the Digital Folder Number or FHL microfilm which will not change. Typically, the Digital Folder number and the image number within the Digital Folder Number are provided as part of the index entry. The image in the first citation can be found directly by FamilySearch.org > Search > Catalog > 5247167 and then go to image 1932 and the second image by FamilySearch.org > Search > Catalog > 004138771 and then go to image 65. My citations would read.
1. Genealogical Committee, LDS Church, “Cemetery Records: Yountville, Napa, California,” MS (Salt Lake City: Filmed by the Genealogical Society, 1956), unnumbered p. 2, Mary Francis Boggs (1851–1856); digital image, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/catalog : accessed 1 April 2015), DGS 5247167 > image 1932 of 2007; citing FHL 2100, item 12.
1. St. Liborious Church (St. Libory, Illinois), “Liber Baptismalis ab anno 1849 die 30 Murt. usque ad initium anni 1863,” unnumbered pages, unnumbered entries in chronological order, “Elisabetham Aberle” baptism, 12 November 1857; browsable images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/search/catalog : 1 April 2015), FHL 00413877 > image 65 of 721.