15 replies to this topic

[robertjm]

Hi all,

 

In looking over my imported TMG database I must have a good 20-30 source templates which start with _TMG_

 

As an example, the first one is _TMG_Baptismal_Record. Of course there is also a regular Baptismal Record source template already included in RM7.

 

Does the fact that this template was imported mean I definitely have records from TMG, which used that source type? Or was it simply brought over in the import? If I delete the source template will that have any effect on any records that might've been imported with that type?

 

I don't want to mess up anything that's been brought over. But, if it's a duplicate source template, I'd just assume I get rid of it since it's stuck at the top of the list.

 

Thanks!

 

Robert

[Renee Zamora]

The only way to tell that a Master Source is using that Source Template is to go to Lists>Source List and then open each one up to Edit. In the upper right corner you will see the name of the Source Template it is based on. If you delete the Source Template any Master Sources created using it will be deleted too. 

[robertjm]

EWW! Glad I asked. Is there an easy way to convert a source type?

[Renee Zamora]

No, not that I can think of. You can merge Master Sources but they need the same fields in both so nothing is hidden.

[TomH]

Here's a SQLite script that shows the usage of source templates: http://sqlitetoolsfo...te List - Query

No easy way to convert sources from one template to another, if that is what you mean.

[Dick-TMG]

I also am converting TMG source templates. I tried creating a duplicate of the TMG source using the Rootsmagic source definitions. I then merged the TMG source with the new Rootsmagic source I just created. The source now points to just the Rootsmagic source template. Is this the correct way to do this or am I creating more issues?

[Jerry Bryan]

I also am converting TMG source templates. I tried creating a duplicate of the TMG source using the Rootsmagic source definitions. I then merged the TMG source with the new Rootsmagic source I just created. The source now points to just the Rootsmagic source template. Is this the correct way to do this or am I creating more issues?

 

What you are doing is standard practice. You should be ok as long as both source templates have the same data elements in common.

 

Jerry

[Dick-TMG]

Thanks Jerry, I have enough to do without creating any additional issues

[DJY]

I'm a new Roots Magic user (3 days in) and I'm migrating my TMG project via direct import.   I also have the weird _TMG_ sources, only my sources are missing a lot of information.  Only the title (or perhaps abbreviation) and the repository show up.   I'm willing to modify each of my 1500 sources (beats creating a new source & reestablishing 25,000 citations), but there are no fields for me to edit.  It's like I have a skeleton source.  I've followed the instructions in the TMG guidance document to click on other source types & back in TMG to resync the sources but it didn't help.  Would this source merging where I create a mirror source for each of my 1500 sources work in my case where I have a skeleton source?  [What I mean by skeleton: on the "edit source screen" the source title appears in the Master Source box.  Underneath is a yellow box.  Normally, the source fields are in the yellow box.  Mine is just a big yellow box with nothing in it.  It also doesn't list a source type.]

 

Also: some of my sources, which were source type "census-filmed" came over (for some odd reason) as Pension films source types and the information I had in the source fields in TMG doesn't show up.  Did that information not come over or is it hiding somewhere, waiting for the proper source structure to pull it forward?  [Sorry if that's a dumb question.  I'm mystified by what's going on and how to fix it so I don't have to re-enter source & citations from scratch.]  

 

I'm willing to restructure my sources in TMG since I can modify source types without losing the links to the events but I don't know what to change them to!  I've played with converting one of my wills to the different types of will sources but they all have the same problem upon import.

[TomH]

If the Source or Citation Editor display no field structure, there is something wrong with the source template. Either the source is pointing to an empty one or to a nonexistant one. I don't know how this could happen. You may have to submit a request to Tech Support and send in your TMG database file.

 

Your source data may have imported. One way to find out is to examine your database with SQLite. If they have been, it is possible to reverse engineer what the source template should be or perhaps correlate with what you have in TMG. Creating such a template anew and repointing the sources to it with SQLite would correct the error in your database but not for anyone else.

[DJY]

Thanks, Tom.  I don't know how to use SQLite (or any behind-the-scenes database tools).  Is there a link you can send with instructions to do what you're suggesting?    I would take mental comfort from know that my empty sources are recoverable, leaving me to deal with only the skeleton sources separately with tech support.  

[Jim Byram]

Please read the information in the TMG import document regarding sources and how to fix them in TMG before importing. Your description fits the issue exactly.

[DJY]

Thanks, Jim.  I'm glad to hear that these are known problems; it gives me hope that it's fixable!  I thought I HAD followed the TMG import document but I obviously missed something.  My project is set to "custom source" and I clicked on another source type and clicked back to try to sync (e.g., changed it from "census-filmed" to "book" and then back to 'census-filmed."  The data is in fields that start with capital letters (and the fields with lowercase letters are present but empty).  The file validation found no errors.  What did I miss?  I've been making these changes in each source.  Should I be making changes to the source types rather than the sources?

[DJY]

I've added a new source in TMG with the exact same fields as the RM source but it still transfers incorrectly as a shell of a source.  I went back and tried a GEDCOM import and all my sources came over just fine!  What's going on?  

 

I got very excited with the GEDCOM source import but I'm missing too many events with principle roles.  I'll do some research to figure out if I can merge projects or maybe change all my events in TMG to put my tags back to straight "principle" roles for a better GEDCOM import. (It seems easier to change roles than to deal with the source issue.)  Are these bad ideas?  Or is there another way?   It seems like direct import would be best I'm still not sure what I'm doing wrong on the direct import to mess up my sources.

[Jim Byram]

The issue is in TMG where a source appears to have one source type but actually has a different source type. The fix, in TMG, is to select some different source type for the source and, then, to select the correct source type. Cleaning this up in TMG takes a small fraction of the time that it would take to fix it in RM.

 

One person said, that if you use the List of People to copy all individuals to a new project, the source type issue will be fixed. I tested that and it didn't work. You could try that and maybe it will work for you. Note that process will lose History group tags and any other unlinked data.

[DJY]

I prefer to fix it in TMG if I can figure out what I'm doing wrong.  Is it possible that my templates are corrupt?  If I switch my "will source" to a "book," then I get a source with partially completed data fields imported into RM (partial because I really am missing some fields for that source type, like authors).  If I switch it back to a will type (any of the 4 will templates I have), then it imports as a shell again.  So I don't seem to be able to select the "correct" source type.  All of my "will" source types share the same "closest to" source type.  It's not just a "wills" problem, though.  I've switched to other source types and some work, some don't.