Jump to content


Photo

RM5 - County/State check & Living indicator


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 munchie

munchie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 11:24 AM

Overall, I am pleased with the new release. Following several days of data entry to RM5, I am aware that the county/state check is NOT being performed on a marriage 'place'. Also, I don't think the 'living' check is considering any marriage date. Seems to me, if the marriage date is 100+ years from current date, obviously the partners are probably not living. Not big things, but they would sure help! Thanks ...

#2 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8489 posts

Posted 05 December 2011 - 12:23 PM

Overall, I am pleased with the new release. Following several days of data entry to RM5, I am aware that the county/state check is NOT being performed on a marriage 'place'.

I am unable to confirm these findings. I tested on the Edit Person screen adding a marriage fact with a county that did not exist at the time frame and CountyCheck spotted the error. I also ran the CountyCheck report and it is reporting on the marriage fact place with an error. Where are you seeing this issue?

Also, I don't think the 'living' check is considering any marriage date. Seems to me, if the marriage date is 100+ years from current date, obviously the partners are probably not living. Not big things, but they would sure help! Thanks ...

Confirming issue is in our tracking system.
Renee
RootsMagic

#3 forty-two

forty-two

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 13 March 2012 - 01:32 PM

I agree the "Living" toggle should consider the marriage date. I would even like to see it default to "Not Living" by making even more intelligent conclusions when I enter an individual with no birthdate or date of death. For instance, if the individual had any event more than 105 years ago, or a marriage more than 90 years ago, or had a child who with any event more than 90 years ago, or had a grandchild with any event more than 75 years ago, and so on ... or had a child who was married more than 75 years ago, or had a grandchild who was married more than 60 years ago, and so on ... or had a spouse with any event more than 155 years ago ... or had a sibling with any event more than 155 years ago ... or if the sibling had a marriage or a child more than 140 years ago ... or had a parent with any event more than 155 years ago ... or a parent who had a marriage or a child more than 140 years ago.

You could cautiously set even more parameters based on he individual's parents-in-law, children-in-law, half-siblings, great uncles, grand nieces, and so on, to at least ensure people from the 1700s won't show up as "Living".

This would not only save the effort of clicking the "Living" box to remove the checkmark when you're sure the person is deceased. It would also continuously change people to "not living" when one of the parameters indicates the person must be deceased.

We could debate what the right number for each parameter should be. I figured if we can assume a person is deceased at age 105 and that the person didn't have a marriage or children before age 15, then the toggle should change to "Not Living" when the person's child reaches age 90.

Right now I have a database with 20,000 individuals. I have a lot of ancestors from the 1600s and 1700s who are still living. Sadly for my ancestors and for me, this isn't exactly right. It's going to take a lot of work to go through 20,000 people to make corrections. I have cousins who are still alive, whose names I don't always recognize. So when there's no birth year in the Index on the left side of the page, I have to check each person and sometimes several of their relatives before I can decide whether the person should be changed to "Not Living". A few years from now, my data will be out of date with respect to who's living ... unless I go to the additional effort of filling in estimated birthdates for people who are, or possibly are, still living.

I faithfully privatize my data, including the names of living people, when making GEDCOMs for sharing with others. It looks funny right now to see my 300 year old ancestors and cousins with their names changed to "Living" by the Privatize feature.

On a related note, I'm using RM4 so I can't comment on RM5. But I would like to be able to temporarily privatize my data before making an ancestor tree or descendant tree before sharing the report with someone who doesn't use genealogy software. Family Tree Maker has this capability and I believe RM should have it too ... it's tedious to create a privatized GEDCOM, then open it in RM in order to share a privatized report.

Doug