Jump to content


Photo

TMG Migration forum?

TMG GEDCOM IMPORT

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

#41 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 28 September 2014 - 09:03 PM

I used to put parentage data in the General note, but I never felt comfortable with that. I was always going from the Birth fact to the General note to see parentage data.

So I decided there was no birth which took place without parents and decided to put that data in the Birth note where I was always looking for it anyway.

I would put the data about John Doe naming Samuel as his son in his will in Samuel's Birth note and link the source for the will to that fact.

John Doe named his son, Samuel Doe, in his will which was dated ? and recorded in ?.

Other possible situations for parents:

Samuel's birth certificate names his parents as John Doe and Jane Smith

Samuel's birth parents were John Doe and Jane Smith. His father died in 1921 and his mother married Jim Jones in 1922. Samuel lived with his mother and Jim Jones until he married in 1935.

Any supporting sources for the note are linked to the Birth facts.

#42 CherylCh

CherylCh

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 29 September 2014 - 10:52 AM

 

....

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.

 

Jerry,

 

I suspect this will appear only in imports from TMG or other software that explicitly recognizes a parent-child relationship separately from the Birth fact.  In my RootsMagic database imported from TMG, the ChildParent fact appears below the dated facts, with no Date, Details, or Age information, but the source column is checked and all my sources for the parent/child relationship are present.  I would upload a screenshot but I haven't figured out how to do that on this forum yet. :huh: (That's me, looking confused)



#43 CherylCh

CherylCh

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 29 September 2014 - 12:26 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.

[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
 

Laura,

 

I was interested to see that none of the narrative reports have a sentence for the subject of the report that says something like "He was the son of John Smith and Mary Davis."  That information appears for the spouse of the subject, but not the subject himself.  On, for example, the family group sheet, where the parental information does appear, you are of course correct that the source information I attached to the parents doesn't show up at all.  So that won't work. 

 

I will go experiment some more.  I will be interested to see if I create a new Fact for the relationship (in addition to the birth) how that will be handled in reports.  The ChildParent fact appears only in my imported TMG database, and that's too big to play with.  So I will create the same fact in my practice database and see how it works.

 

Cheryl

 



#44 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3487 posts

Posted 29 September 2014 - 01:08 PM

 

 

....

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.

 

Jerry,

 

I suspect this will appear only in imports from TMG or other software that explicitly recognizes a parent-child relationship separately from the Birth fact.  In my RootsMagic database imported from TMG, the ChildParent fact appears below the dated facts, with no Date, Details, or Age information, but the source column is checked and all my sources for the parent/child relationship are present.  I would upload a screenshot but I haven't figured out how to do that on this forum yet. :huh: (That's me, looking confused)

 

 

After I had posted my message of befuddlement, I ran across a message on the TMG-REFUGEES mailing list where a TMG user converting to RM said that the RM import from TMG was adding a ChildParent fact to RM as a way of preserving relationship data from TMG that otherwise wouldn't be stored in RM. So I now sort of understand what is going on.

 

This new ChildParent relationship fact serves very admirably as a place within RM to attach a citation of evidence for a parent/child relationship. Absent this ChildParent fact, I would still suggest that RM does not natively have a good place to attach a citation of such evidence. Laura's suggestion of attaching a citation of such evidence to the child's birth fact is probably the best idea I have heard, but it still seems dissatisfying. Does anybody know what happens when you import data from Family Search Family Tree into RM where there is a citation attached to the parent/child relationship on the FSFT side of the house? Surely that doesn't create a ChildParent fact on the RM side of the house. But if not, then where does the citation go on the RM side of the house?

 

Jerry



#45 CherylCh

CherylCh

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 29 September 2014 - 05:08 PM

I agree that the ChildParent fact is good in that it preserves the source citations for the relationship.  My problem is figuring out how to get the statement into reports.  I looked at the help files and got this far with a sentence template:

[Person:First] was the <%son|daughter> of

There are two problems with this approach.  The first, and most obvious, is that there doesn't seem to be a sentence field for the mother or father of the person we're talking about.  I'd think there almost has to be one somewhere in the program, though, or I don't see how the spouse's parentage could be printed in the narrative reports, and it is.

 

The second problem is that if I mark ChildParent for inclusion in narrative reports, it's there for both the subject of the report and his wife, like this (emphasis added):

1.  Edgar Cicero Hill was born on 23 Feb 1879 in Jackson County, Georgia.12 Edgar was the son of3 He died on 10 Oct 1935 at the age of 56 in Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia.1,4

Edgar Cicero Hill and Ethel "Lallie" Harris4 were married on 15 Dec 1912 in Winder, Georgia, United States.1 Ethel "Lallie" Harris1, daughter of John Littleton Harris, was born on 15 Jun 1889 in Jackson County, Georgia.12,5 Ethel was the daughter of4

 
As you can see, even if I could use a "parent" field, I'd still have this duplication problem.  Sigh.  Back to the drawing board.  From what I've seen of RootsMagic so far, I really like it.  I know I'll have to make some compromises and do a lot of cleanup, but my TMG projects aren't as heavily customized as those of a lot of the real "power users," so there may be hope for me.


#46 hlein

hlein

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 30 September 2014 - 08:10 AM

I am using TMG in German language.

 

As TMG is multilanguage - are there any plans for internationalization of RM ?


Regards

Helmut


#47 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 30 September 2014 - 08:57 AM

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

http://sqlitetoolsfo...itation Details

This script has been extensively revised to convert any number of splits in the Citation Details values into the separate fields ([CD1] to [CD9]) present in the imported sentences and to adapt the Source Template accordingly.
 
There is no technical reason that the direct import should not do this job completely. As it is, the import results in deeply flawed footnotes for split citations, with the citation details stored in a defined [CD] field but the sentence trying to retrieve from undefined [CD#] fields. 

Edited by TomH, 01 October 2014 - 02:08 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.


#48 LornaHen

LornaHen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 30 September 2014 - 02:21 PM

 

...Does anybody know what happens when you import data from Family Search Family Tree into RM where there is a citation attached to the parent/child relationship on the FSFT side of the house? Surely that doesn't create a ChildParent fact on the RM side of the house. But if not, then where does the citation go on the RM side of the house?

 

Jerry

Jerry,

When you select a source from FamilySearch Family Tree you get boxes to tick about which fact it supports.

If you tick eg christening  and family (ie the parents), the source gets added to both the christening fact and the parents of the individual

eg "Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950," index, FamilySearch (https://familysearch...M9.1.1/VQ4R-NZ9 : accessed 30 Sep 2014), Alexander Fairbairn, 29 Nov 1789; citing , PENICUIK, MIDLOTHIAN, SCOTLAND, reference ; FHL microfilm 1067788.



#49 jcsturgis

jcsturgis

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 01 October 2014 - 09:31 AM

On the basis that I am currently evaluating software to replace my TMG setup, the only thing I have left to worry about with RootsMagic is the absence of the aforementioned Flags.  Has there been any progress on this?



#50 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 01 October 2014 - 02:54 PM

There has been no software update released that adds import for and support of "flags" as known in TMG. RootsMagic has equivalents to a couple of TMG's 'standard' flags, Sex and Living, but I suspect that your main interest is something like TMG's custom flags. This feature has probably been on the RM WishList for a long time, indicating that it has not been a priority for development. Perhaps that will change if many prospective TMG émigrés give voice to their need.

As discussed earlier, it has been suggested that one or more custom fact types could be used in RootsMagic to provide similar functionality for color-coding and filtering. Of course, these do not restrict the entry of values to a predefined set nor can they be set en masse as flags can be in TMG. Nonetheless, you should give thought to how you might achieve what you need without the TMG flags concept. Would it work for you were the import to convert each type of custom flag to a custom fact type?

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.


#51 jcsturgis

jcsturgis

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 05:36 AM

Tom,

I've considered the use of custom fact types and also creation of groups ... I've just created a new topic on the main forum (sorry) with a number of questions on my experiments.  Any chance you could have a look and let me know what you think.

Thanks,



#52 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6179 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 06:22 AM

An answer posted http://forums.rootsm...tmg/#entry66472

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.


#53 hlein

hlein

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 09:21 AM

In TMG I make heavy use of

 

 

- Flags and accenting

- Repeat-key (F3)

- Drag & Drop to add media for exhibits (in sources and events/facts)

- find/search a source when adding an existing source (no find in RM Cite existing source)

- Alternate Names (married name etc) in Events/facts and sentences

- Roles also for principals (not only witnesses)

- secondary output in reports to set flags

 

I did not find adequate features in RM.


Regards

Helmut


#54 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 10:54 AM

Flags = User defined facts in RM are more versatile. The search criteria and Groups eliminates the need for flags for data that can be searched.

I don't know what Repeat key does in TMG

No, RM will not drag and drop media anywhere, you have to tag it yourself, but you can do that from one place. Select the media in the Media gallary or Media Album and tag it to every where you want to tag it to without having to navigate to the person, event for a person, place, or Master source or Source detail first.

Start typing the Master source name, and it will take take you to the Master source.

Add married names to the Alternate name fact.

Given: Jane Mary (Doe) [Doe is the maiden name]
Surname: [married surname]
Prefix: Mrs.

This has the advantage of showing the Alternate name in the Sidebar Index, RootsMagic Explorer, and People view if you choose that option. It makes it easy to find a married woman if you don't know her married name. You can type her marriad surname, given name in the list and it will take you to.her record. You can also mark the Alternate name fact as Private or globally restrict the fact from printing in reports at Lists, Fact type list.

Principle is the role for the Principle [person the fact is added to and then shared with other people as Witnesses or whatever other Sharee roles you have setup.].

Secondary output in reports to set flags. Flags as they are used in TMG are not supported in RM at least right now. It depends on whether Bruce decides to change that in the future. User defined facts print in reports.

No program you change to is going to have the same database structure as TMG. If you don't like RM, find one that you like better. Whatever program a user chooses is going to require some adjustments in their expectations and how they enter data.

#55 hlein

hlein

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 12:58 PM

 

Flags = User defined facts in RM are more versatile. The search criteria and Groups eliminates the need for flags for data that can be searched.

Flags are added to every person with a default value when the person is added. Events/Facts are not. Flags have defined allowed values. Facts don't. Every person has the same flags. This is not necessarily the case with facts.

 

 

I don't know what Repeat key does in TMG

It repeats the last input for a field in a form (last 10 values of every field are memorized for every fact/event type). It repeats in a circular way for the field you are in.

 

 

No, RM will not drag and drop media anywhere, you have to tag it yourself, but you can do that from one place. Select the media in the Media gallary or Media Album and tag it to every where you want to tag it to without having to navigate to the person, event for a person, place, or Master source or Source detail first

When you have several hundreds or thousands of exhibits, you are out of luck using the gallery. You need to use Add New Media / Image / from Disk / navigate to the directory, select/open the file. Or you could have an Explorer Window and drag it from there into RM media pane.

 

 

Start typing the Master source name, and it will take take you to the Master source.

A find function usually is not limited to the beginning of the name.

 

 

Add married names to the Alternate name fact.

Given: Jane Mary (Doe) [Doe is the maiden name]
Surname: [married surname]
Prefix: Mrs.

Sure. No problem (besides the fact that the Married name could be created automatically when the marriage is entered).

 

 

This has the advantage of showing the Alternate name in the Sidebar Index, RootsMagic Explorer, and People view if you choose that option. It makes it easy to find a married woman if you don't know her married name. You can type her marriad surname, given name in the list and it will take you to.her record. You can also mark the Alternate name fact as Private or globally restrict the fact from printing in reports at Lists, Fact type list.

But you cannot use the married name in the Death fact or other facts. You cannot use it in the sentence for death. (Examples only, is valid for every event/fact)

 

 

Principle is the role for the Principle [person the fact is added to and then shared with other people as Witnesses or whatever other Sharee roles you have setup.].

But it would be nice if also principles could have roles, e.g. Groom and Bride etc.

 

 

No program you change to is going to have the same database structure as TMG.

Right. But RM wants to attract TMG users. And TMG users don't want to have too many drawbacks. RM should take care of this.

 

 

If you don't like RM, find one that you like better.

That means: piss off ??  Nice way to treat possible customers.


Regards

Helmut


#56 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8375 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 01:34 PM

Helmut, I think your last comment was uncalled for. Laura is one of our sweetest and most helpful users on this forum.  I think her last comment deserved to have the sentence after that acknowledged "Whatever program a user chooses is going to require some adjustments in their expectations and how they enter data."  She was only trying to tell you how to make things work in the best possible way inside RootsMagic. We have a lot of faithful users that choose RootsMagic precisely because it didn't work the way TMG did. We are not going to now turn around and make RM become TMG. We are just trying to be helpful and allow TMG users and option to use our program if it will work for them. Maybe we will add some TMG features, maybe not, but the whole program is not going to act like TMG and it never will. That neither means we want people to come to or leave RootsMagic, we just want mutual respect for all. 

 

I know how our other users feel about Laura so let this comment suffice and lets get back to the business of helping you make things work the best they can in your new environment. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#57 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3444 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 01:38 PM

That means: piss off ??  Nice way to treat possible customers.

In TMG I make heavy use of


- Flags and accenting
- Repeat-key (F3)
- Drag & Drop to add media for exhibits (in sources and events/facts)
- find/search a source when adding an existing source (no find in RM Cite existing source)
- Alternate Names (married name etc) in Events/facts and sentences
- Roles also for principals (not only witnesses)
- secondary output in reports to set flags

I did not find adequate features in RM.


This is a forum for USERS to help others, which is what Laura is trying to do for you. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. Be advised not to expect any of what you are speaking, at least in the short-term, and be glad if/when any incorporation occurs. You'll have to -make or not- your purchasing decision based on the RM-capabilities that you know about, as of today. We users do not benefit nor are we even interested in your purchasing decision.

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#58 hlein

hlein

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 02:08 PM

Hi Renee, kbens0n,

 

Maybe Laura did not think about it, but this one comment sounds rude.

 

I know quite well, that every product is different and they cannot be (and maybe should not be) equal. Everyone has its goodies.

But fact ist that TMG has some very appreciated features and some possibilities to ease its use (like repeat key, the manner of entering new persons and many more, also the screen layout where you have everything concerning a person on the same screeen: person details similar to RM timeline, children, siblings, associated people like godfather, marriage witnesses, priests etc, explorer, flags). And it is (at least in my opinion) far ahead concerning reports. I think that also RM users could benefit from such features and facilitate (and speed up) their work.

 

I also do know that TMG users are not at all alike and they use TMG in different ways. But some central features are used by all of them.

 

And it is also correct that TMG has its "problems", e.g. creation of websites or that it cannot support Unicode/UTF (something I would really like to have because of Czech ancestors)  due to its underlying database.

 

RM for sure is powerfull and although it seems to be the best alternative to TMG at the moment it lacks some features that I would not like to miss and in my case would cause some loss of information. Besides that, TMG does not (yet ?) speak German - but there are not many equivalent products that do either. I think me and most of today's TMG "power"-users will observe the development of RM and its competitors during the next months and then make their decision.


Regards

Helmut


#59 CherylCh

CherylCh

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 02 October 2014 - 04:08 PM

I found a function somewhat similar to F3, at least for source citations. In the Citation Manager window, there are buttons for Memorize and Paste.  This will "memorize" the current source citation, including the details, and paste the entire citation where it is next needed.  I was getting a little frustrated with data entry until I noticed that. 



#60 Robsmith

Robsmith

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 03 October 2014 - 01:46 AM

I am a TMG user trying to decide which product to migrate to. After running a couple of trial conversions the one thing that puzzles me is that TMG uses the memo field for things such as Cause of Death and it is available in sentences.

RM puts the memo contents in the Note field which is not addressable in a sentence structure. Surely it should transfer the contents of the Memo field to the description field?

It would certainly help with the many thousands of tags that I have which use the Memo field.