7 replies to this topic

[Glenn]

A distant cousin sent me a second email.
My original Master Source Name is (pseudonym) John Jones and carries the date of the First Message
I don’t want to have a new master source for every email, so how do I move the date from the Master Source to the Citation, which doesn't have a date field?
I kind of think that instead of using Jeff LaMarca's source templates as is, I should have copied and somehow revised the copy. But Jeff's template already had a preceding asterisk (*), which confused me.

Any assistance to lift the confusion will be greatly appreciated.

[TomH]

Whatever you do, you are going to have to edit every citation of a source when you move data from the master to the detail. Since you are using this template for many sources as a standard template, you would need to inspect all those sources to see if the master date field is generally used before revising the template to move the Date field to the Detail area; the date values will not move and will appear lost.

Alternatively, you could add a second date field (with a different field name), this one to the Detail area and preserve the Master date field and values. Then when you edit the citations you will have the master date value on screen, available to be copied to the new Details date field. Once satisfied that you have edited all citations of that source, then it's safe to delete the master date.

[Glenn]

Thank you, Tom, for the extensive explanation. Per my normal "protocol", I have saved it to a word document for careful using off line.

[Vyger]

I have to apologise up front but this touches on another subject which maybe needs improvement and further discussion, the Correspondence List.

Many years ago I created one of my very few Custom Facts “EMAIL” with the Description field enabled. This allowed me to enter the date of the Email, what it mainly pertained to and paste the email into Notes. This idea was never ideal as an email could refer to various people but splitting out the pertinent sections to the individuals referred to was the best fix for me that I could find.

I wonder should the Correspondence List have a link or multiple links to individuals where the Edit Person screen shows the existence correspondence pertaining to an individual.

[Nettie]

Have about 50 free form source citations they have been carried thru from FO days. The date I received them is in the footnote right after the name of the person who sent the letter. Use the Misc Event or create a letter fact, which I added, has all emails, fax/Telegram and hard copy letters on this fact type have the Date, Place, Place Details, and Description fields enabled. Description can say either one of the several choices. Sentence template looks like this: [Person] received <[Desc]> on <[Date]> <PlaceDetails]><]Place]>. Says 'Nettie received an email on 15 Aug 2012 in Minnesota.'

Notice that EE Source Citations for letters also have a date, maybe in the wrong section, then copy the template and make it your own by putting it where you want it.

[TomH]

Glenn's problem arose from using a complex source template, i.e., one with many fields and with fields of specific types (e.g., Date). Despite Jeff's naming them "Simplified...", they remain complex and a trap for the unwary; "unified" or " homogenized" might be more accurate adjectives. The trap is that the division between lumping and splitting is set by the complex template and that division may be different for different types of sources and different users. Thus the template would need to be revised for different source types and user preferences leading to more templates than the original 3 or 4.

On the other hand, the Free Form template and the extended !MyFreeForm3 template have the fewest possible fields needed to support Footnotes, Short Footnotes, Bibliography and the most acceptable GEDCOM, with no typecasting. Unlike having to modify a source template to correct a split, with all its complications, the user merely has to edit the citations of a source and its master source to revise the split.

[Renee Zamora]

I have to apologise up front but this touches on another subject which maybe needs improvement and further discussion, the Correspondence List.

Many years ago I created one of my very few Custom Facts “EMAIL” with the Description field enabled. This allowed me to enter the date of the Email, what it mainly pertained to and paste the email into Notes. This idea was never ideal as an email could refer to various people but splitting out the pertinent sections to the individuals referred to was the best fix for me that I could find.

I wonder should the Correspondence List have a link or multiple links to individuals where the Edit Person screen shows the existence correspondence pertaining to an individual.

Confirming enhancement request is in our tracking system.

[Glenn]

I have to apologise up front but this touches on another subject which maybe needs improvement and further discussion, the Correspondence List.

I wonder should the Correspondence List have a link or multiple links to individuals where the Edit Person screen shows the existence correspondence pertaining to an individual.

The Correspondence List is something I have never used -- guess it's something else to look over. Lots of luck to me!