Jump to content


Photo

Productivity Discussion for current and future versions

productivity places sources citations research manager place details media gallery reporting

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

#41 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 02:42 PM

Vyger, what is the point of dragging up RM 3 features that are not in the current version if you aren't wanting them added to RM 7?

RM 3 is still available for download for those who miss it.

http://www.rootsmagi...tes/RootsMagic/

#42 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6250 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 02:50 PM

 in RM3 you could see an indication of the existence on both RM Explorer and Edit Person not to mention Address.

 

 

Good point. WebTags was added with a counter to indicate presence in Edit Person but none of these buttons are even displayed in RM Explorer.


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.


#43 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3566 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 02:57 PM

Another piece of functionality which was lost in the transition to RM4 and continues to be a potential source of duplication is the checking when a place is edited in Edit Person and I suppose I should also add the automatic merging of exact duplicate places RM3 done.

 

placeamend.png

 

The loss of this particular functionality was an extremely good thing because the functionality was so dangerous. Here's a simple example that happens to me all the time.  Suppose I have a death place of Hamilton County, Tennessee and later discover more specific information that allows me to change the death place to Chattanooga, Hamilton County, Tennessee. It's obviously not always Hamilton County and Chattanooga, but I'm regularly able to find new data that allows me to make place names be more specific.

 

With the old functionality, it asked me if I wanted to change all occurrences in my database of Hamilton County, Tennessee to Chattanooga, Hamilton County, Tennessee. In exactly 0% of the cases, I would say Yes, and for obvious reasons. But it's so easy to slip up and say Yes by accident. And if you say Yes by accident to this particular question, you are pretty well doomed. You have to go back to your last backup and lose everything you have done since, or you have to go back to your last backup and find every single example of Hamilton County, Tennessee so you can correct every corresponding place in your current database.

 

It is now the case that you have to make global changes to places in the Place List which is precisely where you should make them.

 

Jerry



#44 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 03:23 PM

Vyger, what is the point of dragging up RM 3 features that are not in the current version if you aren't wanting them added to RM 7?
 

 

Laura, I am not dragging up anything per say, but if useful features and indications disappear over time does that not deserve mentioning and addressing, after all those very features were once wishes back in the day.

 

I believe you misunderstand my drive, I have searched and cannot find one instance where you supported anything I posted. I am actually trying to help Rootsmagic build a superior program which I believe will benefit both you and I. All people have different qualities, none superior to others, just different IMO. I can fully understand you not agreeing with my opinions or methods so in those cases simply say "I don't agree" if you feel it's important for others.

 

For the record I think you describe some very useful working methods and I read your posts with interest, I suppose I would just rather RM dealt with program shortcomings which are agreed as such with others rather than developing ways to work around those shortcomings, after all computers are meant to make life easier and save us time, not waste it.


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#45 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 03:28 PM

It is now the case that you have to make global changes to places in the Place List which is precisely where you should make them.

 

I can see your point Jerry, these things can be dangerous, still hopefully better Place management and reconciliation will come through less dangerous functionality.


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#46 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6250 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 04:10 PM

No please don't add this as an enhancement request, it is a long outstanding miss that got lost in the bug squishing after RM4 was released.

 

Vyger, what is the point of dragging up RM 3 features that are not in the current version if you aren't wanting them added to RM 7?

I think Laura interpreted vyger's statement as saying he did not want the feature when he was really requesting that the feature which existed in RM3 be restored, ergo, not an enhancement to RM7, per se, but a long outstanding deficiency which should be given some priority over new features.

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.


#47 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 21 January 2015 - 04:42 PM

 
I think Laura interpreted vyger's statement as saying he did not want the feature when he was really requesting that the feature which existed in RM3 be restored, ergo, not an enhancement to RM7, per se, but a long outstanding deficiency which should be given some priority over new features.

 

Good arbitration TomH, even I can see that now.


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#48 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8446 posts

Posted 22 January 2015 - 10:56 AM

 

Renee is correct and these are all little things I would suggest really should be linked. To-Do lists got some makeover with the introduction of RM4 but some functionality was lost and never reinstated. Currently you cannot see an indication of the existence of a To-Do in either RM Explorer or the Edit Person screen whereas in RM3 you could see an indication of the existence on both RM Explorer and Edit Person not to mention Address.

 

No please don't add this as an enhancement request, it is a long outstanding miss that got lost in the bug squishing after RM4 was released.

 

 

I added it anyways. This is something I never noticed before so I'm glad you pointed it out.


Renee
RootsMagic

#49 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 22 January 2015 - 11:22 AM

 

I added it anyways. This is something I never noticed before so I'm glad you pointed it out.

 

I was very confusing in my terminology, I was saying it's not something which should be defined as an enhancement and up for consideration but rather something which went missing and needs to be reinstated.

 

Anyway we lost that right hand pane in RM4 Explorer but even on the Edit person screen we get an indication of the existence of WebTags but not Address To-Do or Research Log.


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#50 billbremer

billbremer

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts

Posted 15 February 2015 - 09:34 AM

 

I agree that it's very much akin to the Media tag concept, but wouldn't it be a citation that's being tagged rather than a Master Source? (well, unless you are an extreme splitter!  ^_^ )

 

Actually, "tagging" citations to individuals and to facts would, I think, require some pretty significant but useful changes to the way the source and citation tables work. Which is to say, if you memorize and paste a citation, RM does not simply make a "link" of some kind between the memorized citation and the object to which the citation is being pasted. Rather, it makes an identical copy of the citation and it's the identical copy that's "linked" to the object to which the citation is being pasted. This is very different than the way, for example, that Places and Place Details work where under normal operations Places and Place Details are not duplicated just because they are used multiple times.

 

The significant and useful changes to the way the source and citation tables work in turn ought to make some useful improvements to the way the user interface appears to the user. For example (and to keep things really simple), let's suppose you have many citations for page 12 of a particular book and that you are using the Free Form source template. Suppose that in the Details part of your citation you say "p.12" without the quotes and that you memorize and past the citation many times. Then, suppose that for stylistic reasons you want to change all the occurrences of "p.12" without the quotes to "page 12" without the quotes. As things stand, you have to find and change every single citation. This is the issue that finally drove me to becoming an extreme source splitter. With the tagging concept, you should be able to make the change only one time even though it's in the Details part of the citation.

 

Jerry

Amen to this.

 

I do not want to be dragged kicking and screaming into the "extreme source splitter" camp.  Changes to detail text in citations, like the one you describe above, happen all the time, and not just for stylistic reasons.  I sometimes discover a typo or omission in a citation after I've already pasted it to a dozen different facts for eight different people.  Now I have to find those 12 facts, delete the erroneous citations, and paste the corrected one.  Very tedious!



#51 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3566 posts

Posted 15 February 2015 - 03:15 PM

Now I have to find those 12 facts, delete the erroneous citations, and paste the corrected one.  Very tedious!

 

Or find those 12 citations and edit each one, making exactly the same edit to each one. Just as tedious! (And also error prone because it's hard to make exactly the same edit 12 times in a row without making some kind of error at least once.)

 

Jerry



#52 zhangrau

zhangrau

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1518 posts

Posted 15 February 2015 - 03:29 PM

Yeah, I've made this kind of mistake.

Ctrl+A and Ctrl+C on the first (corrected instance)

Ctrl+A and Ctrl+V on the rest of the batch that need correcting



#53 Don Newcomb

Don Newcomb

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1045 posts

Posted 19 February 2015 - 08:31 PM

It is no secret that RM8 will be a complete re-write and maybe a completely new look for all of us to get used to. 

 

Hopefully, they will take at least a moment to think about making the quality qualifiers (e.g. proven, disputed, etc) some way even vaguely functional features. 



#54 GalinAZ

GalinAZ

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 21 February 2015 - 11:14 AM

Deleting the duplicate record during Merge search

 

I have been merging databases to clean up my files and I've been using the "Duplicate Merge Search" under "Merge" under "Tools".

 

I think it would be useful to have the option to "delete duplicate" in addition to "merge duplicate into primary".  Since I'm updating information from old databases into the newest one, the old records may match but have older spellings and places that have since been corrected.  Merging creates duplicate facts that I can see are only spelling differences.  I'd prefer to be able to indicate that the duplicate, although a match, should be deleted.



#55 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 21 February 2015 - 11:31 AM

Deleting the duplicate record during Merge search

 

I have been merging databases to clean up my files and I've been using the "Duplicate Merge Search" under "Merge" under "Tools".

 

I think it would be useful to have the option to "delete duplicate" in addition to "merge duplicate into primary".  Since I'm updating information from old databases into the newest one, the old records may match but have older spellings and places that have since been corrected.  Merging creates duplicate facts that I can see are only spelling differences.  I'd prefer to be able to indicate that the duplicate, although a match, should be deleted.

 

Very good points GalinAZ, this is a feature I like using but the scope of it and the real potential for duplication is a downside exactly as you said.

 

I am planning a screencast of DSM where I will highlight where I believe things are weak and could be better. The only problem I could possibly see with your suggestion rather than enhancing the merge operation is where family links existed, had you thought on that?

 

Years ago I proposed the screen enhancements below, to aid this process, after using DSM again recently I have a few other ideas to make this feature better.

 

merge-screen-mockup.png


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#56 genealogy4primm@earthlink.

genealogy4primm@earthlink.

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Posted 26 October 2015 - 04:26 PM

 

Very good points GalinAZ, this is a feature I like using but the scope of it and the real potential for duplication is a downside exactly as you said.

 

I am planning a screencast of DSM where I will highlight where I believe things are weak and could be better. The only problem I could possibly see with your suggestion rather than enhancing the merge operation is where family links existed, had you thought on that?

 

Years ago I proposed the screen enhancements below, to aid this process, after using DSM again recently I have a few other ideas to make this feature better.

 

merge-screen-mockup.png

 

 

Vyger,

 

I like your mock-up and have thought the same, especially concerning the selectivity and 'amend' rather than 'merge all'. This enhancement would save a tremendous amount of time going back over the individual records to clean up a lot of partial, yet somewhat duplicates fact entries after merging. Currently we can select to 'Edit' either one or both of the duplicates, then merge, hoping the 'character for character' is a match (comes down to click counts and jumping from screen to screen to edit an individuals record - in a limited fashion, then returning to Duplicate Search). As well the Sources should merge as same source if indeed an exact match 'character for character', rather than adding a new source of the exact same text & detail. For that matter ditto for Place Name, Place Details. Possibly even adding in the 'Options' "change Fact Type' button; which would be helpful in the case of conflicting birth Dates or Places so we can change them to reflect as such, yet retain the 'preferred' data integrity.

 

I have also thought that adding a 'To Do' button above the Primary Person and Duplicate Person in the Duplicates Search results screen for the individual duplicates would be helpful, as at time I see some possible matches, but need to do some research on them, so not necessarily 'Not A Match' or ready to merge as a duplicate. Also along with adding a 'To Do' a button above each reported possible duplicate, I would add a lower button to indicate I have identified these as 'Possible Likely Duplicates' aka the new 'Not Sure' as in Family Search. This could lead to various avenues of reporting which, I believe, would allow us to output these records of question in a PDF To Do list report as flagged as 'Not Sure'; or omit them. There could also be a filter placed in the Duplicate Search screen to allow us to omit those duplicate records already defined as 'Not Sure', as well as a filter selection to only report those in the Duplicate Search as 'Not Sure'.



#57 genealogy4primm@earthlink.

genealogy4primm@earthlink.

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 70 posts

Posted 26 October 2015 - 04:35 PM

 

Very good points GalinAZ, this is a feature I like using but the scope of it and the real potential for duplication is a downside exactly as you said.

 

I am planning a screencast of DSM where I will highlight where I believe things are weak and could be better. The only problem I could possibly see with your suggestion rather than enhancing the merge operation is where family links existed, had you thought on that?

 

Years ago I proposed the screen enhancements below, to aid this process, after using DSM again recently I have a few other ideas to make this feature better.

 

 

 

Vyger,

 

I hope the DSM you mention refers to 'Duplicate Search Merge' concept rather than the The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). :) 



#58 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 27 October 2015 - 09:50 AM

 

 

Vyger,

 

I like your mock-up and have thought the same, especially concerning the selectivity and 'amend' rather than 'merge all'. This enhancement would save a tremendous amount of time going back over the individual records to clean up a lot of partial, yet somewhat duplicates fact entries after merging. Currently we can select to 'Edit' either one or both of the duplicates, then merge, hoping the 'character for character' is a match (comes down to click counts and jumping from screen to screen to edit an individuals record - in a limited fashion, then returning to Duplicate Search). As well the Sources should merge as same source if indeed an exact match 'character for character', rather than adding a new source of the exact same text & detail. For that matter ditto for Place Name, Place Details. Possibly even adding in the 'Options' "change Fact Type' button; which would be helpful in the case of conflicting birth Dates or Places so we can change them to reflect as such, yet retain the 'preferred' data integrity.

 

I have also thought that adding a 'To Do' button above the Primary Person and Duplicate Person in the Duplicates Search results screen for the individual duplicates would be helpful, as at time I see some possible matches, but need to do some research on them, so not necessarily 'Not A Match' or ready to merge as a duplicate. Also along with adding a 'To Do' a button above each reported possible duplicate, I would add a lower button to indicate I have identified these as 'Possible Likely Duplicates' aka the new 'Not Sure' as in Family Search. This could lead to various avenues of reporting which, I believe, would allow us to output these records of question in a PDF To Do list report as flagged as 'Not Sure'; or omit them. There could also be a filter placed in the Duplicate Search screen to allow us to omit those duplicate records already defined as 'Not Sure', as well as a filter selection to only report those in the Duplicate Search as 'Not Sure'.

 

All very good points and your to-do suggestion brings forward the possibility of Quickgroups inclusion where one could create a QG for 'DSM further work needed' or the like.

 

The UI I described in the mockup back in 2011 mostly exists in the new Compare Files UI sadly it has not yet made it into DSM. Go to the link below and watch the 6 minutes from 30:30 and you will see mostly how I wanted DSM to work better towards helping prevent duplication and provide more information.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=B_ybuoDgXkg

 

I am not a RM7 user so cannot give feedback on the Compare Files feature but I have read of the forum it is not without its problems in its present form, DYOR.

 

 

I hope the DSM you mention refers to 'Duplicate Search Merge' concept rather than the The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). :) 

 

If DSM doesn't get improved in the future I might be needing that manual :D

 

merge-screen-compare.png


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#59 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 02 November 2015 - 02:36 PM

Please have RM Media gallery remember the last user choice when adding media from the gallery.

 

In other words when I select Add from Gallery ant I last used LIST view, please return me to List view next time.

 

Also in the Search box please employ some predictive searching when I start to type the file name for subsequent tagging.


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#60 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8446 posts

Posted 03 November 2015 - 11:08 AM

Confirming enhancement requests are in our tracking system.


Renee
RootsMagic





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: productivity, places, sources, citations, research manager, place details, media gallery, reporting