Gary Samson Posted 3 January , 2005 Share Posted 3 January , 2005 A technical question concerning the casualty identifiers (I'm assuming these are primary keys for the database) used on the CWGC website (see attached image). I guess it's very unlikely, as they're an integral part of the database design, but are these liable to change at all in the near future? I'm intending to record these numbers, as well as the cemetery identifier, as part of the information I collect on local memorials and turn them into live web links. Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie Posted 4 January , 2005 Share Posted 4 January , 2005 Hi Gary, Couldn't seem to get the attachment to open. Robbie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Samson Posted 4 January , 2005 Author Share Posted 4 January , 2005 Hi Robbie, Ah, the attachment isn't one you can open, it's just an image on which I've highlighted the casualty identifier. Gary PS. It actually points to Kitchener's CWGC entry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 4 January , 2005 Share Posted 4 January , 2005 Gary I have been told that these numbers cannot be guaranteed to stay the same especially as CWGC are testing an entirely new system. I'll let you know if I hear more. I had a similar idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie Posted 5 January , 2005 Share Posted 5 January , 2005 Hi Robbie, Ah, the attachment isn't one you can open, it's just an image on which I've highlighted the casualty identifier. Gary PS. It actually points to Kitchener's CWGC entry. Hi Gary, Yes..may I claim a senior moment? or perhaps jetlag? Ta mate Robbie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Samson Posted 5 January , 2005 Author Share Posted 5 January , 2005 Thanks, Terry. I think I'll go ahead and record the existing cemetery and casualty numbers for the time being and see how things change when the new system passes testing and goes live. (Do you have any details on this, by the way?) For my purposes, it wouldn't be too much effort to update this information manually if a similar approach is implemented by the CWGC designers but using different identifiers, although I appreciate this isn't a solution that would scale for larger projects. Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j.r.f Posted 5 January , 2005 Share Posted 5 January , 2005 SORRY PALS I am having one of my thick moments.WHY is it important to know and collect the casualty numbers?I am sure there is a good answer.Please enlighten me. CHEERS. JOHN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 5 January , 2005 Share Posted 5 January , 2005 John Gary is not going to record the numbers for the sake of it as they are essentially meaningless. However, he intends to create a web link to the CWGC record for each of the casualties in his database - one click on the link and you go straight to the relevant record or possibly the certificate available on the CWGC site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j.r.f Posted 6 January , 2005 Share Posted 6 January , 2005 THANKS TERRY JOHN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludovica Posted 10 February , 2005 Share Posted 10 February , 2005 This probably sounds a bit thick, but how come the CWGC website doesn't seem to contain all the same info as the Roll of Honour? I recently contacted CWGC about the omission of my great uncle Philipps Stroud RN and they weren't hugely helpful IMO and couldn't find a trace of him, and now I am a little wary of asking why the following guy is in the Roll of honour but not on the website. Does anyone know what the protocol is for getting information added or corrected on there? ROLL OF HONOUR OF THE GREAT WAR DALTON G S (George Silas) Sub D2. Already serving in the Navy since 1899 he was posted for duty in HM Submarine D2 at outbreak of war in August 1914 and rendered valuable service in the North Sea. Unfortunately his boat was blown up on December 1st 1914 and he was killed. He was entitled to 1914-15 Star, General Service & Victory Medals. “ a costly sacrifice on the altar of freedom”. 6 Fratton Grove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 10 February , 2005 Share Posted 10 February , 2005 Ludovica Who is missing from the CWGC , Phillips Stroud or GS Dalton. This is the link to GS Dalton http://www.cwgc.org/cwgcinternet/casualty_...asualty=2870952 Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludovica Posted 10 February , 2005 Share Posted 10 February , 2005 Ludovica Who is missing from the CWGC , Phillips Stroud or GS Dalton. This is the link to GS Dalton http://www.cwgc.org/cwgcinternet/casualty_...asualty=2870952 Andy Wow thanks.. didnt spot it.. odd as I went all through them about twice! blind spot!. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil_York Posted 10 February , 2005 Share Posted 10 February , 2005 Gary is not going to record the numbers for the sake of it as they are essentially meaningless Terry I've found the casualty identifier in the CWGC site URL to be of help when trying to determine whether particular casualties are recent/new commemorations. OK, this system may only work for the most recent cases of new commemoration but I wouldn’t say the identifier is meaningless. Examples of men commemorated by the CWGC in the past 12 months. I’ve personally not seen WW1 CI numbers much higher that this: Lieut. Alexander Douglas ANDERSON 17.7.16. Casualty Identifier 75196541 47577 Pte. Harry CARTER 31.7.17. Casualty Identifier 75196770 TTFN Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 10 February , 2005 Share Posted 10 February , 2005 Neil You are right and that is one use to which I put them. However, they have no meaning in relation to the details of any casualty and are simply allocated by computer for its own purposes. There are many gaps in the numbering as well. The numbers do not relate to WW1, WW2 or anything else. They are random although in sequence. Therefore, the number itself has no meaning, but it can still be of use. You should also remember that the number is allocated to the 'record' and not to the casualty. Therefore, if a casualty's record is deleted for some reason and then reinstated, it will have a different number. The same applies if a casualty was omitted in error during the initial computerisation process (some were). When these were discovered and added back, they gained later numbers making them look like newly commemorated names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil_York Posted 10 February , 2005 Share Posted 10 February , 2005 The same applies if a casualty was omitted in error during the initial computerisation process (some were). When these were discovered and added back, they gained later numbers making them look like newly commemorated names. Cheers Terry, one to look out for. Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now