Jump to content


TMG Citations

TMG Free_form Import Citations

  • Please log in to reply
1 reply to this topic

#1 ricklach


    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 06 July 2017 - 01:24 PM

I imported my TMG file using both native and gedcom import procedures.  I had produced a number of source templates in TMG that were useful in TMG.  However, they were not imported in either import process.  One of the source templates is referenced over 100K times and so I do not want to start over to reproduce this one particular source in RM.


The particular source in question is the Drouin Collection that is found on Ancestry and is of the type database and images.  RM has a template for Drouin Collection (microfilm) but that is not the correct format.  I did find a template on the internet that was associated with Elizabeth Mills and that is the format that I adopted.  When I imported my particular template using gedcom, it was assigned to a RM template named " Free_form" and while it contained all the relevant information, it was missing some parts that were recommended by EE (Elizabeth Mills).  So I thought that I could edit the Free_form template, add the missing parts and I would have my 100K citations in the proper format.  However, there is no Free_form source template in RM that I could find!  So I am looking for a work-around.


I thought I would take the existing "Drouin Collection" template, copy it, rename it, and then edit it to produce the output that I had previously used.  That would give me a new and useful template that I could use for future work.  However, I would like to merge the actual data from my existing Free_forn template with my new Drouin Collection (database and images) template to solve the problem quickly and get back to my research and writing.  Does anyone have any suggestions on how this might be done, including going back to my TMG sources template and modifying it so that it exports a properly formatted citation that can be read by RM.  I welcome any suggestions.

#2 zhangrau


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1581 posts

Posted 06 July 2017 - 07:47 PM

I decided years ago to avoid the many issues of using multiple templates to format the data in source citations, and have happily used the Book, Basic Format template in RM for the vast majority of my sources. Enthusiasts of the EE approach may think I'm skipping "essential" information in my citations, but I disagree. If the purpose of a citation is to allow my readers to find my original sources (in the unlikely case that they want to duplicate and verify my work), then I believe my approach facilitates that goal. If the purpose of source citations is to follow a complex, arcane set of rules to define me as an "expert," then maybe my approach in incorrect.


When merging sources & citations using different templates, the problem will be in how to map the fields of the original template into the fields of the new template. Software doesn't see similarities, only exactitude, as a sufficient guide for automatically merging data. So the two templates (original and new) MUST have EXACTLY the same number and NAMES of fields. Sequence shouldn't be important (but it might be in some software).


If your TMG template fields are included in the GEDCOM output, then you may be able to create a companion new template in RM BEFORE importing the GEDCOM. This template should be certain to include all of the correct fields, and perhaps should even share the same template name, as your TMG work. Maybe this approach would also work if you create that new template in a blank RM database before doing the native import of the TMG data. Experimentation may be the path toward success . . .


Once your TMG GEDCOM is in RM, you can modify that new template, if necessary, and and those changes should affect all of your source citations based on that new template.