Perhaps a seemingly trivial question, but your opinion would be appreciated.
Sometimes the way in which ScotlandsPeople states their reference numbers could result in recording them incorrectly. I believe I have a solution, but I'm wondering about just how much leeway I have in the way I cite them.
For example; a downloaded file has the name, "ScotlandsPeople_C1851_328_00_003_000_2_007Z.jpg." The stated reference number is, “328/ 3/ 7.” For one unfamiliar with the numbering scheme, this could very easily be incorrectly typed or adjusted during proof-reading as, "328/3/7," due to the lack of place-holders for the dropped digits. In fact; until I delved into how the records were numbered, I often copied the reference incorrectly.
(Note that the single digit "1" or "2" in the filename denotes a header record or the main document record and that the numbers before and after the "/" characters have specific meanings. All downloaded records appear to end in "Z".)
So; when citing the record that someone else may later wish to examine in person or to purchase, would citing the reference as, reference no. 328/00 003/000 007, be acceptable? Note that I would not use quotation marks, because this would be my interpretation of the number. However; I would think that a reader would clearly understand it and a proof-reader would be unlikely to incorrectly adjust the string.