13 replies to this topic

[HermanduPlooy]

I have asked this question a long time ago, but wants to try again. I want to export the descendants of a family say "Jones", with the daughters husbangs but without her children. Now under "Select people by data fields" I can use "equal Surname=Jones" or "equal Surname (birth or married)=Jones) and it will give me all the Jones but without the daughter's husbands.

 

A friend told me about the added entry in Legacy where you choose "equal Spouse's Surname=Jones" and "equal Surname=Jones" which gives you all the Jones and the daughters husbands but without het children.

 

How do I get the same information from RootsMagic without a lot of manual work with colour coding, etc?

[kbens0n]

I don't have RM handy, but it would seem that all you need to do is export a GEDcom:

- Mark the starting person for descendants 

- Mark descendants & spouses

- Unmark sex is male

- Export/import and run a marriage list from that

[HermanduPlooy]

Thank you. Where do I unmark sex is male?

[kbens0n]

Thank you. Where do I unmark sex is male?

 

Using ->Clear people by data fields option of the Ungroup button dropdown

 

[TomH]

That will export women only. I don't think that was the goal.

[kbens0n]

That will export women only. I don't think that was the goal.

 

DOINK ! Duh... yep that was an obvious oversight ;-)

I'm again not near RootsMagic but perhaps:

 

Unmark group:

- Sex is Male

- AND Marriage exists is False

 

but I'm not sure that includes unmarried "Spouses"

[Jerry Bryan]

This one is tricky and I'm not yet sure if it can be done or not from within RM. But I'm also not sure exactly what the desired outcome is.

 

What if you have somebody in your database named Jones who is not descended from your most distant Jones ancestors. Also, the focus seems to be on the husbands of the Jones women, but what about the wives of the Jones men. Aren't they supposed to be included? I'm not sure that the proposed solutions will include both the husbands of the Jones women and the wives of the Jones men.

 

I'll keep thinking about it. My assumption is that you want the wives of the Jones men and all their descendants until you hit a non-Jones, and that you want the husbands of the of the Jones women without any of their descendants. Is that correct? (Well, unless the husband of a Jones woman was himself a Jones, of course.)

 

Jerry

 

[TomH]

My understanding of the goal is all the descendants of the person named Jones including spouses but exclude only the children of female descendants whose surname is not Jones. I don't think there is any way to do so within RM.

[Jerry Bryan]

My understanding of the goal is all the descendants of the person named Jones including spouses but exclude only the children of female descendants whose surname is not Jones. I don't think there is any way to do so within RM.

 

The following comes pretty close. I'm assuming you don't have any stray Jones from another family to enter the tree.

• Clear all colors for everybody.
• Color code Jones and all his descendants plus their spouses as red.
• Color code anybody who is red and whose Surname (birth or married) is Jones as green. This only requires a spousal relationship as RM defines it, and does not require marriage facts or any other family facts.

As this point, your desired people are green (but see below). If you want a group, make a group from the green people.

 

Descendants of the Jones daughters will all be red, but the Jones daughters themselves will be green. The husbands of Jones daughters will be red. If you want the husbands of the daughters to be green, then that's pretty hard to do in RM. That may be why Tom is saying this can't be done in RM. It just depends on whether you need the husbands of the Jones daughters or not. The problem lies in eliminating the children of the Jones daughters without also eliminating the husbands of the Jones daughters.

 

Jerry

[HermanduPlooy]

Hi TomH, that is my aim, like I say it is easily done in Legacy with the "Spouse's surname = Jones" and "Surname=Jones", is it too difficuly to add this to RootsMagic "Select people by data fields"?

 

The obvious problems is to work in RootsMagic, export it to Legacy to get the desired gedcom with just the family "Jones and all their descendants, but excluding the married daughters children, they will apear under their family name.

 

How does Legacy get it right?

[mjashby]

What you are describing won't do what you want in either Legacy or RootsMagic without a great deal of thought and design; and would have to be defined very much more explicitly. Whether or not Legacy can do this 'simply' would have to be tested/explained by Legacy Users.

 

Examples of a few potential and likely problems and pitfalls that need to be planned for in any query definition:

 

 - What about daughters who had JONES children before they married, who may or may not have retained that name after after their mother married?

 - What if a daughter named JONES married a man named JONES and they had children named JONES?

 - What about the illegitimate offspring of the male JONES line that did not carry that name.

 

I would expect that this would need to be very well thought through and designed as a general database query, SQLite in the case of RootsMagic and Microsoft Access in the case of Legacy; and then applied within RootsMagic, or externally as an SQLite/Microsoft Access Query depending on which program is used.

[HermanduPlooy]

The process in Legacy, although not applicable here, is really very easy.  You search, find, detailed search and "Look for whom" - "individual, "Where to look" - surname, "How to look" - equal to, "What to look for" - Jones or "Look for whome" - individual, "Where to look" - spuse's surname, "How to look" = equal to, "What to look for" - Jones. Then "Clear list before search", "Create list", "Options", "Advanced Tagging", "Clear all tag numbers for everyone", "Everyone in search list", "Close, "Close".  The rest of the beauty happens now in the export to gedcom - "Export to gedcom", "Record selection", "All records with an individual tag of" say 1, Mark "Export all spouses of tagged individuals", Mark "Export all children of tagged individuals", "Close", "Select file name and start export. Now you have a gedcom file with all individuals with the surname Jones, their descendants, the daughters husbands but without their children.

 

I am sure you will always have problems cases as mentioned above.

[Jerry Bryan]

The process in Legacy, although not applicable here, is really very easy.  You search, find, detailed search and "Look for whom" - "individual, "Where to look" - surname, "How to look" - equal to, "What to look for" - Jones or "Look for whome" - individual, "Where to look" - spuse's surname, "How to look" = equal to, "What to look for" - Jones. Then "Clear list before search", "Create list", "Options", "Advanced Tagging", "Clear all tag numbers for everyone", "Everyone in search list", "Close, "Close".  The rest of the beauty happens now in the export to gedcom - "Export to gedcom", "Record selection", "All records with an individual tag of" say 1, Mark "Export all spouses of tagged individuals", Mark "Export all children of tagged individuals", "Close", "Select file name and start export. Now you have a gedcom file with all individuals with the surname Jones, their descendants, the daughters husbands but without their children.

 

I am sure you will always have problems cases as mentioned above.

 

If you fight through all the details of the process in Legacy, the missing link in RM is the inability to search for spouse's surname. If RM supported the ability to search for spouse's surname, this would be easy in RM. Basically you would want the people whose name were Jones or whose spouse's surname were Jones. Where RM breaks down is that RM's test of "Surname (birth or married) is Jones" only works for females.

 

Jerry

[Renee Zamora]

I have added this as an enhancement request.