Jump to content


Photo

TMG Migration forum?

TMG GEDCOM IMPORT

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
64 replies to this topic

#1 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6131 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 07:24 AM

This is to suggest that a forum be set up to collect discussions about migrating a TMG project to a RootsMagic database. It will undoubtedly bridge RM6, RM7 and beyond and be the logical place for new and prospective TMG émigrés to look for advice and/or prior experience.

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#2 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8296 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 10:34 AM

I think we are jumping the gun a bit to do that before we even have the RootsMagic direct import available. Right now the solution is to wait until that is finished. If there are issues with the direct import after it is released then we can handle that with the RootsMagic Issues forum. I will Pin this thread so people will be aware that we are working on the TMG direct import into RootsMagic. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#3 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6131 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 11:10 AM

Thanks for pinning. Some early adopters have used/will use GEDCOM and future sharing of data from one TMG user to another RM user will not likely be via direct so I think there will be continuing use of GEDCOM from different versions of TMG to different versions of RM. If you want to separate discussion of direct import from GEDCOM import, that's fine. I'm assuming that you are okay with this topic continuing with anything to do with TMG export and RootsMagic import of TMG GEDCOM, if you intend that discussion of direct import to be elsewhere. I was thinking that a sub-forum or top level forum would be the appropriate structure under which to concentrate all topics specifically related to migrating data from TMG to RM. It could have two sub-forums: Direct Import, GEDCOM.

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#4 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6131 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 03:41 PM

Here is a Google Search that returns all reference to TMG or "Master Genealogist" in the RootsMagic Forums. As of this posting, there are some good discussions of prior experience in migrating from older versions of TMG to RootsMagic. GEDCOM almost invariably results in some loss of data but an upcoming update to TMG 9.04 promises to improve its export to be more friendly to RootsMagic and RootsMagic's future direct import may be even better. From prior reports and an understanding of the complexity of TMG, potential emigres, whether by future direct import or by GEDCOM, would be well advised to prepare their TMG projects by simplifying where possible, avoiding features unsupported by RootsMagic. 


Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#5 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 08 September 2014 - 06:53 PM

Thanks for your work on this Tom.

I do so hope that the direct import copes with the main (to me, at the moment) drawbacks of using GEDCom.

1) Shared principals on an event in TMG wont export the event via GEDcom unless they're a family.

As this is a feature I use a LOT in TMG, to link potential duplicates, relations I don't know how they're related yet, combined information, dna linkages/comments, it would be a heap of work tidying up in TMG in order to be able to export all my data (some 40 yrs of research and 15 yrs of TMG).

2) Flags/Groups

Another feature of TMG that I use a lot are the flags.

Hoping that the direct import may find its way to automatically create groups for all my flags.

 

Over on the TMG forums the discussion re ID numbers - a comment.

My trial import of my TMG data via the expanded GEDcom option happily created RM people in a new database with RINs that looked, on a spot check, to be the same as the ID numbers I know and love.

It was by no means a scientific experiment just a trial.

Didn't try using your post processing utility at all.



#6 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6131 posts

Posted 08 September 2014 - 08:51 PM

I do so hope that the direct import copes with the main (to me, at the moment) drawbacks of using GEDCom.
1) Shared principals on an event in TMG wont export the event via GEDcom unless they're a family.
As this is a feature I use a LOT in TMG, to link potential duplicates, relations I don't know how they're related yet, combined information, dna linkages/comments, it would be a heap of work tidying up in TMG in order to be able to export all my data (some 40 yrs of research and 15 yrs of TMG).

The pending release of TMG 9.04 exports witness tags in a form that RootsMagic recognises as roles in shared events.
The pending update of RootsMagic 6 will import witness tags as roles in shared events.
 

2) Flags/Groups
Another feature of TMG that I use a lot are the flags.
Hoping that the direct import may find its way to automatically create groups for all my flags.

The September RootsMagic Newsletter was silent on flags, stating "we are making every effort to minimize the amount of "clean up" needed when moving from TMG to RootsMagic". 
 

Over on the TMG forums the discussion re ID numbers - a comment.
My trial import of my TMG data via the expanded GEDcom option happily created RM people in a new database with RINs that looked, on a spot check, to be the same as the ID numbers I know and love.
It was by no means a scientific experiment just a trial.
Didn't try using your post processing utility at all.

The match between RM RIN and TMG Reference numbers (REF_ID) is because the latter is exported as the GEDCOM record number, not the actual TMG database record number which ties everything together invisibly within TMG. That may not be the case for direct import because the database record number for a person (PER_ID) is the key for relationships among many tables and is easier and safer to use in RootsMagic. Hopefully, the REF_ID will be imported as a Reference Number to RM; if it is the first Ref# created for each person, it can be displayed after the person's name, making it convenient to compare to the originating TMG database.

You may have had better results with your GEDCOM import with my RMpi utility but, hopefully, you will have no need for it.

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#7 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3369 posts

Posted 08 September 2014 - 09:05 PM


2) Flags/Groups

Another feature of TMG that I use a lot are the flags.

Hoping that the direct import may find its way to automatically create groups for all my flags.

 

 

I've been monitoring the TMG/RM discussions in these forums and over on the TMG forums with interest. It's kind of intriguing to consider how TMG users may accomplish some of the TMG functionality within RM. And one of the functionalities the TMG users talk about a lot seems to be flags.

 

I'm not 100% sure how the TMG flags work, but I'm beginning to suspect that RM's groups might not be the best approach to emulate TMG's flags. Rather, I'm beginning to suspect that the best way to emulate TMG's flags might be with user defined fact types in RM, one fact type for each TMG flag. These new fact types could be used to create dummy facts (or events, if you will) in RM that would not be intended to be printed in reports. Rather, these dummy events could be searched and could serve as the basis for color coding, creating groups in RM, forming columns in RM's People View, etc. The hole in my suspicion would be if TMG's flags can appear somehow or other in TMG's sentence templates for various events in TMG.

 

But even absent TMG conversion considerations, this idea of dummy events based on user defined facts in RM can be a pretty powerful idea. I do a similar thing already using the built-in Refenence Number fact, with my "flag" type data appearing as the Reference Number. An RM Reference Number doesn't have to be a number (it can be any arbitrary string), and a person can have any number of Reference Number events. It's a very powerful idea for "flagging" people for color coding, making groups, forming columns in People View, etc. . But I think it might have been even better if I had done this with dummy user defined fact types rather than with the built in Reference Number fact.

 

Jerry



#8 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 09 September 2014 - 12:09 AM

... one of the functionalities the TMG users talk about a lot seems to be flags.

 

I'm not 100% sure how the TMG flags work, but I'm beginning to suspect that RM's groups might not be the best approach to emulate TMG's flags. Rather, I'm beginning to suspect that the best way to emulate TMG's flags might be with user defined fact types in RM, one fact type for each TMG flag. These new fact types could be used to create dummy facts (or events, if you will) in RM that would not be intended to be printed in reports. Rather, these dummy events could be searched and could serve as the basis for color coding, creating groups in RM, forming columns in RM's People View, etc. The hole in my suspicion would be if TMG's flags can appear somehow or other in TMG's sentence templates for various events in TMG.

 

But even absent TMG conversion considerations, this idea of dummy events based on user defined facts in RM can be a pretty powerful idea. I do a similar thing already using the built-in Refenence Number fact, with my "flag" type data appearing as the Reference Number. An RM Reference Number doesn't have to be a number (it can be any arbitrary string), and a person can have any number of Reference Number events. It's a very powerful idea for "flagging" people for color coding, making groups, forming columns in People View, etc. . But I think it might have been even better if I had done this with dummy user defined fact types rather than with the built in Reference Number fact.

 

Jerry

 

Hi Jerry,

I'm not aware of any output of Flags in sentences, but they can be optionally output  in some reports as a list of the flags for an individual.

That said, with TMG we're spoilt by having SecondSite for extremely flexible webpage generation of our TMG data.

One of the features of that is a Flag section where you can generate a sentence to output if the focus person has flag x.

I use that a lot for generic sentences on my webpages to alert readers that a person is eg part of a DNA Surname project, or is part of a line wanted for a DNA project, on WikiTree, WeRelate

 

For me the power of the TMG flags is a quick reference in a fresh window, which is positioned down my screen right beside my TMG person view list of events (timeline view) of the pertinent bits and bobs I keep track of using flags.

Yes, some of that may well be met by displaying dummy facts in People View BUT People view would need to be much much wider to fit in all my flags <g>and they'd get buried in timeline view.

(Yes, some rationalisation, review may well be in order of what I have some of them for)

 

Some are simply to do notes to self, such as have I checked this person for B D M B events/facts?

This is easily accomplished and visible in the RM "proven" setting, post conversion for new people, but for the many thousands of people already in my main project....

 

Many are for driving the much much more flexible TMG accent colours aka colour coding, which are in effect  groups of permanent interest as opposed to a temporary group of interest in eg a TMG focus group or in RM the result of a query, such as descendants of x, direct ancestors, dna tested, which dna project, quick reference for particular groups of ancestry, geographical area.

 

Many keep track on whether or not the data has been published to assorted sites

If I could save regularly used queries within RM (apologies if I can without resorting to SQLite) and simply run them with very few clicks, yes a custom fact type would be fine, provided I didn't have to jump thru hoops to make sure it did/didn't get output with the data.

 

All the above aside, my main concern is that the data is not lost during an import.

They certainly don't go anywhere near a gedcom export, and a quick refresh of my memory of TMGUtility, didn't show any feature that could convert flags to events.

 

Personally I'm unlikely to convert my main TMG project to RM in the near future, but have been using RM  for a while now for a separate project, and am still finding my way around.

 

Should RM ever consider adding flags, more than the 0-9,A-Z,? values in TMG would be good

I find Legacy's equivalent very very restrictive, unless I'm missing something there whenever I've looked.



#9 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 09 September 2014 - 12:30 AM

LornaHen, on 09 Sept 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:snapback.png

I do so hope that the direct import copes with the main (to me, at the moment) drawbacks of using GEDCom.
1) Shared principals on an event in TMG wont export the event via GEDcom unless they're a family.
As this is a feature I use a LOT in TMG, to link potential duplicates, relations I don't know how they're related yet, combined information, dna linkages/comments, it would be a heap of work tidying up in TMG in order to be able to export all my data (some 40 yrs of research and 15 yrs of TMG).


The pending release of TMG 9.04 exports witness tags in a form that RootsMagic recognises as roles in shared events.
The pending update of RootsMagic 6 will import witness tags as roles in shared events.
 

 

Tom,

You're missing the point.

Yes the 9.04 gedcom export puts witness tags into shared RM events, BUT where a tag in TMG has two principals (regardless of any witnesses) and these principals are not linked in any way as a family - spouse/parent, then the tag does not get exported in the gedcom.

At least that's my understanding and experience, and is noted as such on the TMG forum message about the new GEDCom export feature.

I've just rechecked using 9.03.4 with extended gedcom selected.

The tag I was monitoring was a custom one linking potential duplicates, it was set for export as an EVEN and there is nothing in the gedcom out.

As expected.

So when I eventually do migrate from TMG, only a direct import that can cope with such linkages by reading the  TMG  database directly is likely to work for me, or anyone relying on such features within TMG.

Gedcom isn't really an option



#10 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6131 posts

Posted 09 September 2014 - 06:20 AM

Thanks for the explanation of the non-spousal, dual principals tags you use in TMG. There is no direct equivalent in RM. I dare say that direct import might face the same difficulty - how to handle it? But I wonder if a conventional individual tag with the default Principal role and a second role which you might name Principal2 could serve your purpose. Is there a good method in TMG to find and change all such tags?

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#11 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 09 September 2014 - 06:20 PM

Thanks for the explanation of the non-spousal, dual principals tags you use in TMG. There is no direct equivalent in RM. I dare say that direct import might face the same difficulty - how to handle it? But I wonder if a conventional individual tag with the default Principal role and a second role which you might name Principal2 could serve your purpose. Is there a good method in TMG to find and change all such tags?

Provided the linkages are there the data would not be lost, P1 as the primary person, P2 as a person sharing the fact with whatever role.

But what is lost is the  ease of navigability.

With eg a linked two principal event in TMG you can see both people and their id numbers and jump easily from one to the other by either a double click on the person or Ctrl+I/id number and you're there.

I find it much slower to navigate around RM, particularly to those sharing a fact ( also to sources, a lot more typing/clicking rather than being able to jump straight to a remembered source number)

I am gradually learning a few more of the shortcut keys (eg to an individual number)

And yes, in timeline view of the shared person you can easily see the person sharing and open their person details.

It's the reverse I've not found a convenient quick way of getting to - do let me know if there is one.

 

TMG has an associates window which lists all those connected by a tag/event/fact to the person being viewed so they too can be jumped to quickly by a double click.

 

All being a small price to pay for why I'm using RM for one project - FamilySearch integration for my autosomal dna match investigations, but  larger price for my main TMG project and it's 15 yrs of customizations.



#12 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6131 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 07:26 AM

I don't think you answered my question about the conversion of dual principal tags to principal + witness tags in TMG. You did answer why you might not want to, albeit in the context of why you are not ready to migrate from TMG to RM.

 

Your observations about speed of navigation in RM vs TMG are good. Some RM users have been asking for years for modeless windows for that very reason (which TMG does have).

 

I'm unclear what the reverse is that you are looking for. Getting to any sharee of a shared event from the Edit Person screen? The associates window sounds like a good solution. (Renee, enhancement request!)


Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#13 VirginiaBl

VirginiaBl

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 08:44 AM

Your observations about speed of navigation in RM vs TMG are good. Some RM users have been asking for years for modeless windows for that very reason (which TMG does have).

 

 

For those unfamiliar with TMG's windows and layouts, see

 

http://www.whollygen...-in-v8/?p=58147

 

I suspect no two people in TMG have the same layout.  It's all customizable - colors, fonts, lines or no lines, columns or not, choice of windows, multiple layouts - say for specific tasks.  Add the custom toolbar and you have a very efficient working space.

 

Virginia



#14 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8296 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 12:45 PM

Confirming enhancement request is in our tracking system. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#15 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 03:51 PM

I don't think you answered my question about the conversion of dual principal tags to principal + witness tags in TMG. ...

I'm unclear what the reverse is that you are looking for. Getting to any sharee of a shared event from the Edit Person screen? The associates window sounds like a good solution. (Renee, enhancement request!)

Provided the custom shared events in TMG converted to say Principal one going to Person and Principal two being shifted to a share on the fact in RM along with any of the witnesses from TMG, all with their roles intact, the data is not lost or misinterpreted.

One thing I've noted in RM is that if I try to create an equivalent custom shared fact it wants to marry off the two people involved.

This is most definitely not an accurate representation of the data being shared.

So I have to make do with an individual fact and share it.

 

In RM I'm trying to keep track of atDNA matches of particular interest in connection with their respective trees, so am constantly trying to navigate between the matches.

 

In TMG other than the potential relations/known relations without the known tree already mentioned, another way I use such custom tags (facts) is to keep track of researchers I'm in touch with for a particular surname.

So I have a number of non people, with the appropriate surname, and to that "person" I attach the researcher and the ancestor of interest to her, one as a witness, the other as Person 2 on the shared tag.

The uses of such shared events are endless, limited only by imagination - if you ignore the downstream impacts of having to eventually migrate to another program <_<

 

And yes the "reverse" is indeed "Getting to any sharee of a shared event", but not necessarily just from the edit screen - it would be good to not have to open the edit screen to find the sharee.

 

The  navigation link that is missing is to easily be able to see, from the main person view, who all a fact is shared with and jump to them.

Timeline view works fine for the shared with person, but I've not found an easy way to view the shares and jump to them, particularly if they aren't in the immediate family.

In Timeline view the sort of equivalent of the TMG associates window is the "People who share this fact window" that pops up when you click on the number in the ?share/family? column. If the people listed there were clickable that would be an improvement (and had a Go to button that jumped to the highlighted person?)



#16 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6131 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 09:16 PM

I agree that accessing the sharees could be a lot easier. Just to make sure we are on the same page, the route from the TimeLine View is:

  1. Click on the number box under the couple icon (OR double-click on the shared event which opens the Edit Person window with that event selected and click on the Share button) to open People who share this fact window
  2. Select one of the sharees and click Edit or double-click on the sharee to open Edit shared event window
  3. Click Select to open RootsMagic Explorer on the sharee
  4. Edit Notes, Citations, Media by clicking on appropriate check boxes; Edit facts, events by double-clicking on one to open Edit Person screen on the sharee.
  5. You could loop to #1 and keep stacking up instances of (Edit Person,) People who share this event, Edit shared event, RootsMagic Explorer but you can only access the one on top to work on or close.
  6. To return to Edit shared event without changing who the sharee was you selected in #3, click Cancel in RootsMagic Explorer

Accessing the other sharees from any other main View is always via Edit Person.

 

 

[Edited to get the alternative starts reading logically]


Edited by TomH, 10 September 2014 - 09:27 PM.

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#17 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 10 September 2014 - 09:45 PM

Thanks Tom that helped a little.

I'd completely missed the Select button at your step 3 as I'd been expecting a double click on the person to take me to that person (but can see why it shouldn't)

Adding the Select button to the People who share this fact window instead of/as well as on the Edit shared event window would be useful for someone, like me, simply wanting to navigate.

Never occurred to me to try edit, to find further navigation options, as I wasn't trying to edit, just navigate



#18 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6131 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 09:12 AM

Adding the Select button to the People who share this fact window instead of/as well as on the Edit shared event window would be useful for someone, like me, simply wanting to navigate.

Maybe something like this would be feasible and much more direct. And change the existing Edit button to "Edit role" and maybe add a column with preview of the "witnesses'" notes. I'll bet Vyger has already posted a more comprehensive proposal...

 

People_Who_Share_This_Fact_Custom.png


Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#19 Bizegrama

Bizegrama

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 01:10 PM

Glad to see there will be a bridge for TMG users, but unfortunately I migrated my database via Gedcom a few years ago and am still cleaning up the sources, etc.  I still used TMG for printing some reports, though I have not updated databse since I migrated Gedcom to RM.

 

Most of my Tags came across, but some I have had to edit the sentence structure.  Sources were also messed up.

 

So I am hopefully future migration will be easier for TMG users.



#20 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8296 posts

Posted 11 September 2014 - 05:33 PM

Maybe something like this would be feasible and much more direct. And change the existing Edit button to "Edit role" and maybe add a column with preview of the "witnesses'" notes. I'll bet Vyger has already posted a more comprehensive proposal...

 

People_Who_Share_This_Fact_Custom.png

 

Confirming enhancement request is in our tracking system. 


Renee
RootsMagic