Jump to content


Photo

TMG Migration forum?

TMG GEDCOM IMPORT

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

#21 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 12 September 2014 - 07:37 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

 

As I explore and experiment further, one thing that all of this conversation misses is that yes, you can easily EDIT the person sharing from the shared person in timeline view, and with the above suggested change to the 'People who share this fact' window above, and Tom's further suggestions also simplify slightly the route to edit the person added as a share when you start at the person sharing.

However its the navigate rather than edit that I miss most.

Is there some way to switch focus from sharing to shared and vice versa so that the pedigree/family/descendant views are all available?

From the edit screens being talked about here I can't spot that path.

I keep right clicking on a person eg to jump to the and expecting to see "change focus to this person" but it's not an option.



#22 jrwhiskey

jrwhiskey

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 06:15 AM

 

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

Jerry - I use flags to create groups of people ... I have flags for those who served in specific wars, ancestor interest codes, if they are twins, mariners, mayflower descendants, etc. I also use them for Second Site output - similar ways to LornaHen.

Julie



#23 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 10:25 AM

As I explore and experiment further, one thing that all of this conversation misses is that yes, you can easily EDIT the person sharing from the shared person in timeline view, and with the above suggested change to the 'People who share this fact' window above, and Tom's further suggestions also simplify slightly the route to edit the person added as a share when you start at the person sharing.
However its the navigate rather than edit that I miss most.
Is there some way to switch focus from sharing to shared and vice versa so that the pedigree/family/descendant views are all available?
From the edit screens being talked about here I can't spot that path.
I keep right clicking on a person eg to jump to the and expecting to see "change focus to this person" but it's not an option.


You can navigate to different family members with the Sidebar in Family. Family shows the Spouse(s), Children, Parent's and children of the focus person.

Double clicking on a person in Sidebar, Family opens that person's Edit person screen. When you close the Edit person screen, the new person is now the focus on the main screen.

On the Timeline view, the column with the two people icon is the shared fact column. The number in the column is the number of people that fact is shared with. Clicking on the number brings up the People who share this fact screen.

A Edit person screen must be closed before, we can make another person the focus person either from the Sidebar, a main screen, or RootsMagic Explorer.

RootsMagic Explorer can be a good choice for navigating to and editing different family members, especially if you don't want to change the focus person on the main screen.

When you open RM Explorer, the highlighted person is the focus person on the main screen.

You navigate between family members by highlighting the person in the lower right pane and selecting the Go to selected person button.

In the top right pane, you can open the highlighted person's Edit person screen by double clicking on a fact or the Edit button.

When you are through using RM Explorer, click on Select to change the focus person on the main screen to the last person highlighted in RM explorer.

Or, click on Cancel to keep the focus on the same person that was the focus person when RM Explorer was opened.

Open RM Explorer from Search, Person list or the Magnifier icon on the Taskbar.

It is hard to break old habits and create new ones when working with a new program. It took me awhile to get used to the changes in RootsMagic after using Family Origins so long. It took me months to quit automatically clicking on the fact in the left pane of the Edit person screen trying to open a screen to edit a fact even though the right pane was there in plain site when I highlighted the fact.

I suspect that when RM7 is released we will all be trying to break some more long tern habits and relearning RootsMagic after the rewrite of the program.

#24 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 17 September 2014 - 03:26 AM

...

On the Timeline view, the column with the two people icon is the shared fact column. The number in the column is the number of people that fact is shared with. Clicking on the number brings up the People who share this fact screen.

A Edit person screen must be closed before, we can make another person the focus person either from the Sidebar, a main screen, or RootsMagic Explorer

.....

It is hard to break old habits and create new ones when working with a new program. It took me awhile to get used to the changes in RootsMagic after using Family Origins so long. It took me months to quit automatically clicking on the fact in the left pane of the Edit person screen trying to open a screen to edit a fact even though the right pane was there in plain site when I highlighted the fact.

I suspect that when RM7 is released we will all be trying to break some more long tern habits and relearning RootsMagic after the rewrite of the program.

Thanks Laura.

Yes, navigating around family members is a breeze, but it's the navigation (not edit) from the person sharing to the shared with person, who isn't necessarily a family member, that's causing me the grief here.

Society doesn't apply a constraint that your ancestors only associated with family members!

 

(And yes, I too kept expecting a fact window to open when I clicked on a fact even though it is in plain view and able to be editted :) )



#25 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 17 September 2014 - 09:29 AM

The two quickest way to find a person.

Select the person from the Sidebar, Index.

Select the person in RootsMagic Explorer in the left pane.

Before you share the fact:

Create a Group of the people you will be sharing with and select a person from the Group. A Group caan be used to filter the People view, if you wish.

Bookmark the person that is not a family member before you share the fact with them and select them from the Sidebar, Bookmark list.

If the person has been the focus person during that session of having RM open, select them from Sidebar, History.

If the person has been the focus person during that session, use the Back and Forward Taskbar icons. Customize the Taskbar to add Back and Forward icons or access from the Search menu.

If you are going to be going be accessing Sharee's records after you shared the fact, especially if you have a Sharee that is not related, using RM Explorer can be the most efficient method.

#26 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 21 September 2014 - 01:14 PM

Now that RM 6.3.2 has been released, there are some new and different issues that will arise for direct import of TMG Projects versus those via GEDCOM.
 
I have just published a page (well actually 17 pages) on the differences in sentence template languages and formatting codes which may be of interest to TMG-RootsMagic explorers, especially those technically inclined. It's available for download at:
 
 
The wiki page includes a SQLite query to help find unprocessed TMG codes.
 
An issue which I'm sure many will detect, but surprisingly was absent from the 5000 person project I have tested, is that sentences for sources with split Citation Detail (CD1, CD2,..) do not contain any of the Citation Detail. The full value is there in the [CD] field but the sentence templates use [CD1] etc, not [CD]. A fix is to manually edit the Source Template sentence templates to use [CD] in the sentences - there are only 3 or 4 such source templates in the Sample Project - however that changes the order and lengthens the Short Footnote and the || separator remains in the output. A much better result is to add [CD1] et al fields to the source template field definitions and then edit each citation to separate the pieces out of [CD] into the new fields. Unfortunately, every citation needs to be edited - for some users this may number in the thousands or even tens of thousands.
 
I'm hopeful that the RootsMagician will be persuaded to find the resources to automate this parsing and mapping on import. Meanwhile, I am conceiving a SQLite procedure which might be able to do it after import.

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.


#27 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 21 September 2014 - 05:58 PM

I've created an interim solution to the split Citation Details problem, described at:

http://sqlitetoolsfo...itation Details

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.


#28 tmomeyer

tmomeyer

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 22 September 2014 - 09:03 PM

RE: RM import of TMG person ID as a “fact” (similar to TMG event or tag) and not as the person ID

(From a new list member evaluating TMG to RootsMagic route)

 

I see in RM (RootsMagic), in Tools menu, File Options, and “Number to display after filename” there are user selectable choices to display:

None, Record Number (RIN), Reference Number (REFN), and Family Search ID. 

 

After I did a TMG direct import to RootsMagic, I saw (as others noted on the Rootsweb TMG list) that RM assigned it’s Record Numbers (RIN) and they initially are the same as TMG and after a while veer off into other numbers. 

 

After seeing the above results and reviewing the Rootsweb messages, I recommend that RootsMagic “import” and include an option to show the TMG “user-visible REF_ID.” Whether this ID # is assigned to the RM Record Number (RIN) or added to the dialogue box as another selection choice below Family Search ID, is probably better left to those TMG users more knowledgeable than me.  From my point of view, having the TMG ID display after the name instead of the RM internal ID number would be terrific, however, some TMG users may make a case for having the import translate the TMG ID # to the RM (RIN) #.

 

For anyone reading, note that I’m in an evaluation mode of RootsMagic and not making the switch; simply trying to improve the migration process should that prove to be a way forward due to the announced “end” of TMG development.



#29 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 23 September 2014 - 10:24 AM

You might find the RootsMagic Reference Number fact to be useful. Have a look at 

TMG-RM Convert TMG_ID to Reference Number.

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.


#30 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 23 September 2014 - 12:35 PM

And if you want to get the feel of having TMG_ID codes as Record Numbers, look at 

TMG-RM Convert TMG_ID to Record Number

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.


#31 hlein

hlein

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 09:04 AM

I've tried to import from TMG directly.

 

Married names (Name-marr, Name/Ehe-) are not imported as "Married" name.

There is no equivalent for Baptismal names (Name-Baptm, Name/Tauf-) and Adopted names.

...


Regards

Helmut


#32 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 09:25 AM

Did these alternate names import into the Alternate name fact?

In RM, all alternate names for a person are entered by linking the Alternate name fact in a person's Edit person screen.

There are no provisions in RM to have an alternate name just for married names or baptismal names or adoption names.

#33 torleifro

torleifro

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 10:35 AM

RMv6.3.3 importing TMGv9.04.

Only the standard US english sentences and roles of tags/facts are imported, not my Norwegian ones.

Do I wait for new versions or start translating every fact?

 

Marriage TMG:

[P] married [PO] <[PARO]> <[D]> <[L]>

RM:

[couple] <#Couple#was|were> married< [Date]>< [PlaceDetails]>< [Place]>.



#34 hlein

hlein

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 10:35 AM

The Married Name was imported to Alt-Name. But there is a name type "Married" in Alt-Name that should be used in this case.


Regards

Helmut


#35 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 11:49 AM

RMv6.3.3 importing TMGv9.04.

Only the standard US english sentences and roles of tags/facts are imported, not my Norwegian ones.

Do I wait for new versions or start translating every fact?

 

Marriage TMG:

[P] married [PO] <[PARO]> <[D]> <[L]>

RM:

[couple] <#Couple#was|were> married< [Date]>< [PlaceDetails]>< [Place]>.

I think the sentences for the Principal and Witness roles (not custom roles) for standard fact types that TMG and RM have in common are the default sentences of the RootsMagic fact type, rather than the sentence template from TMG with the names of the variables substituted by the RM equivalent. [PARO], for example, has no RM equal. What happened to your custom tag types? Do you see anything other than English? If not, then the import is extracting only the English language version of sentence templates.


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.


#36 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 25 September 2014 - 01:48 PM

 

And if you want to get the feel of having TMG_ID codes as Record Numbers, look at 

TMG-RM Convert TMG_ID to Record Number

 

If anyone is interested in being able to change RootsMagic record numbers (RINs) whether for the purpose of aligning them with an imported TMG ID value or to some other number for whatever purpose, I have revised my script extensively to do that, providing protection against corruption due to conflicts between the new numbers and the existing ones. It is described and available for download at http://sqlitetoolsfo...o Record Number


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.


#37 CherylCh

CherylCh

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 28 September 2014 - 12:50 PM

I'm another TMG user dabbling my toes in RootsMagic to decide when/if/and to what extent to make the switch.  I've bought v6.3.3.1 and done a direct import of one of my TMG projects.  I've also started a baby database native to RM to help me learn the basics.  Love the webinars, by the way.

 

I noticed something on the import that I think would be an easy fix if it doesn't violate the basic RM structure.  All of my citations for parent-child relationships were, upon import to RM, attached to a ChildParent fact.  It seems more logical to me to have them attached as citations on the Parents line of the Edit Person window.  And in my new database, that's where I'm putting them.  Or is that a bad idea?



#38 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3487 posts

Posted 28 September 2014 - 02:29 PM

I noticed something on the import that I think would be an easy fix if it doesn't violate the basic RM structure.  All of my citations for parent-child relationships were, upon import to RM, attached to a ChildParent fact.  It seems more logical to me to have them attached as citations on the Parents line of the Edit Person window.  And in my new database, that's where I'm putting them.  Or is that a bad idea?

 

I will be most curious how other RM users may answer your question. A frustration I have found with RM and with most of its competitors (and I don't know about TMG) is that there doesn't seem to be a good place to attach a citation that documents parent-child relationships. For example, suppose John Doe was the father of Samuel Doe and the evidence is the will of John Doe where he bequeaths something or other to "my beloved son Samuel Doe". It always seems to me that RM and its competitors force you to attach the citation of the will either to John Doe or to Samuel Doe or to both. To me (and I freely admit to being too literal about such things), none of those choices are the right answer. It seems to me that somehow or other there ought to be a "relationship thingy" to which the citation for the will can be attached, but I guess I don't see such a "relationship thingy" anywhere in RM or in its competitors or in GEDCOM for that matter. Curiously, the only place I've seen such a "relationship thingy" that makes sense to me is in Family Search Family Tree, where there is a very explicit place to document relationships.

 

So I surely stand to be corrected, and I'm eager to be so corrected.

 

Jerry

 

P.S. What do you mean by a "ChildParent" fact in RM? I don't recognize the reference.



#39 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 28 September 2014 - 05:54 PM

It isn't necessarily a bad idea as long as you understand that when you are on a child's Edit person screen and edit the parent's Family notes or add sources or media, you are adding that data to the parent's records not the child's.

That feature is there for convenience only as there is often data we may want to copy back and forth between the parents' and children's Edit person screens or just be able to see what is in the parent's family notes.  It saves us from needing to close a child's Edit pereon screen and then having to open a parent's Edit person screen.  It is a feature users asked for a long time ago.

 A Family note or Family fact applies only to the two spouses not to the children of those spouses.

 If you print a Narrative report starting from the father or mother, you will see that the data you add to the parents Family note on a child's Edit person screen is printed after the Marriage with the Marriage and other Family facts for the parent's and is not printed anywhere for the child.

I add any parentage data to the Birth fact.  You can enable the Description for the Birth fact and enter the parents' name in the descriptionif you wish.

[Person] was born< to [Desc]< [Date]>< [Placedetails]>< Place]>.

 I suggest opening a new database and experiment with entering data in various ways and see how and where it prints in reports to make sure you know what the results are going to be before committing to any great amount of time entering data in the main database
 



#40 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3487 posts

Posted 28 September 2014 - 08:25 PM

I add any parentage data to the Birth fact.  You can enable the Description for the Birth fact and enter the parents' name in the descriptionif you wish.
 

 

Just to clarify, in my example of John Doe's will where he names his son Samuel Doe, the will would be cited as a source for Samuel's birth event? (I'm not speaking to the larger question of how Samuel's birth sentence or birth note would read in a report. I'm just speaking to the question of where in RM the will would be cited as evidence that Samuel was the son of John.)

 

Thanks,

Jerry