Jump to content


Photo

Source citation export/import issues

Source citation GEDCOM import export

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 snallygaster

snallygaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 10:17 AM

Hi. I've only been using RM for a few weeks now, after having used PAF since 2000 or so. So far I like all the options RM offers, and have been working on cleaning up my source citations. I've been lurking here for a few weeks and learning a lot from all of these informative posts, and based on what I've learned, I've been trying to decide whether to lump or split my census citations. To discover what would be best, I have been trying different input options, ie., free form, templates, and the original !MyFreeForm and !MyFreeForm3. To test how these would export to GEDCOM and then back into another program I downloaded Family Tree Builder and Legacy Family Tree.
 
I created a dummy database with just one individual. For this person I created 4 citations as seen below.
 
1. Free form census citation with the following footnote and short footnote:
 
Footnote: 1860 U.S. Census, Baltimore City, Maryland, population schedule, 18th Ward,  p. 698 (penned), dwelling 4600, family 4820, household of Jas. Schofield; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com: accessed 17 Jan 2002); citing NARA microfilm publication M653, roll 465. 
 
Short footnote: 1860 U.S. Census, Baltimore City, MD, pop. sched., 18th Ward,  p. 698 (penned), dwelling 4600, family 4820, household of Jas. Schofield. 
 
2. Original MyFreeform. For this I entered "1860 U.S. Census MFF" for the footnote and short footnote and added the information that followed in my free form citation in the two detail fields, below.
 
3. MyFreeForm3. For this I entered "1860 U.S. Census MFF3" for the footnote and short footnote and then details in the fields below.
 
4. Lastly, another free form citation, with "1860 U.S. Census FF2" in the footnote/short footnote fields, and then the rest of the information in the details field using the method described by Randy Seaver (http://www.geneamusi...itation-in.html)
 
I should note also that for all of these I used Ancestry and the repository, and added National Archives and Records Administration as a secondary repository.
 
After exporting to GEDCOM and importing to the other programs the citations appear as follows:
 
1. 1860 U.S. Census, Baltimore City, Maryland, population schedule, 18th Ward,  p. 698 (penned), dwelling 4600, family 4820, household of Jas. Schofield; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com: accessed 17 Jan 2002); citing NARA microfilm publication M653, roll 465. 
 
2. 1860 U.S. Census MFF.
 
3. 1860 U.S. Census MFF3.
 
4. 1860 U.S. Census FF2.
 
It would appear that none of the details got transferred to the other programs, only what was entered in the footnote field. I also noticed that when looking at these everything was put in the title field of the other programs and nothing was transferred to the details fields. Another thing to note is that once imported the repository information shows as National Archives and Records Administration, not Ancestry, which is strange because Ancestry was set as the primary repository in RM.
 
Has anyone else experience something like this? Am I doing something wrong, and if so, how can I fix it?


#2 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6077 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 09:25 PM

RootsMagic exports the master source data to the TITL tag and the source/citation detail data to the PAGE tag in the GEDCOM file. It seems that the PAGE values were lost somewhere on the way. You should export with the box "Extra details (RM specific)" unchecked when the GEDCOM is to be imported by most other programs - they may trip up on those.


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.


#3 snallygaster

snallygaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 24 February 2015 - 08:44 AM

You're right. Anything entered into the Footnote field in RM gets exported as TITL, and that's what I was seeing. It would appear this was a PEBKAC error on my part. I was only looking at the source reports generated from the imported GEDCOM and I was only seeing the title. Since the entire citation was in the footnote field in my free form citation, that's why I was seeing the the entire citation in the list of sources. After running some different reports I could see the entire citations, TITL and PAGE together. I then used the US Census (online images) template and exported that. Sorry to say that it looked awful in a report. 

 

Note: MyHeritage Family Tree Builder's book reports split the citation from the title. Under sources it only lists the title, and the details fall under citations. If you are importing a free form citation without anything in the details this could be a problem as it lists a blank citation. Mine turned out like this.

 

Citations:

 

1. 
2. Baltimore City, Maryland, population schedule, 18th Ward,  p. 698 (penned), dwelling 4600, family 4820, household of Jas. Schofield; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com: accessed 17 Jan 2002); citing NARA microfilm publication M653, roll 465;
3. Baltimore City, Maryland, population schedule, 18th Ward,  p. 698 (penned), dwelling 4600, family 4820, household of Jas. Schofield; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com: accessed 17 Jan 2002); citing NARA microfilm publication M653, roll 465; 
4. Baltimore City, Maryland, population schedule, 18th Ward,  p. 698 (penned), dwelling 4600, family 4820, household of Jas. Schofield; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com: accessed 17 Jan 2002); citing NARA microfilm publication M653, roll 465. 
 

Sources:

 

1. 1860 U.S. Census, Baltimore City, Maryland, population schedule, 18th Ward,  p. 698 (penned), dwelling 4600, family 4820, household of Jas. Schofield; digital image, Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com: accessed 17 Jan 2002); citing NARA microfilm publication M653, roll 465. 
2. 1860 U.S. Census MFF.
3. 1860 U.S. Census MFF3.
4. 1860 U.S. Census FF2.
 
 
I still need to investigate further to find out why the second repository is listed first, but in the meantime I can just omit the secondary repository before export. In any case, I now have some choices for entering my citations. I can either use free form and have a separate entry for each individual census page (split), freeform with just the census year as the footnote and everything else in the details (lumped), or one of the MyFreeForm templates which would allow me to lump. BTW, Tom, why did you retire the original MyFreeForm? So far I prefer that to the MyFreeForm3 since the footnote and short footnote details are separate and this suits my citation style better.


#4 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6077 posts

Posted 24 February 2015 - 09:49 AM

The reasons I deprecated MyFreeForm and MyFreeForm2 were explained in red at http://sqlitetoolsfo...etter Free Form

Looking that up reminded me of another approach to the problem of export described at http://sqlitetoolsfo...ee Form Hybrids

And, remember, citations using source templates export very cleanly for Jerry's extremely split citations.

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 snallygaster

snallygaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 24 February 2015 - 11:54 AM

Thanks Tom! Now I remember. It's the part in red starting with an all caps WARNING. I have the short term memory of a goldfish. :lol:

 

Anyway I did a quick read about freeform hybrids and extreme splitting on your page. It sounds promising. I'll give it a thorough read when I have time and put it on my list of things to do.



#6 snallygaster

snallygaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 28 February 2015 - 03:54 PM

Hi Tom. I had some time today so I made a copy of my database and ran your extreme split query on it. All I have to say is "Wow!"

 

All of my source citations exported/imported cleanly and without any loss of information as far as I can tell. I still have a lot of source citations to review, and more testing to do, but so far, so good. Now why can't RM add this functionality? I think they should put you on the payroll, you seem to be pretty good at finding solutions for complex problems.

 

Hey RM management! Give this man a big fat check.  :D



#7 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3301 posts

Posted 09 March 2015 - 03:44 AM

And, remember, citations using source templates export very cleanly for Jerry's extremely split citations.

 

Also remember templated sources are the very ones that create duplication on import of even exactly the same data and whilst mamual merge deals with merging the source you are still presently left with duplicate citations.


“Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” -Bill Gates

 

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.5.8, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5 (in order of preference)

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root