Jump to content


Photo

Individuals Marked "Private" - export to gedcom problem

parents gedcom private

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 chignecto

chignecto

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 27 September 2014 - 12:46 PM

In my RM6 database there are a number of living individuals I have marked "private".  My intent is that these individuals should not show up in any reports or exports.

 

I recently exported a gedcom in which I selected to privatize living people to "Name Only" and and I unchecked:

 

"Include private facts"

"Include private notes"

 

When I imported the gedcom into my web site, unfortunately it still included the individuals I had marked private.

 

Can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong?

 

I realize that I can select "Living" for the living individuals, but I do not want that choice universally for my database.

 

Thanks

Don 



#2 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 27 September 2014 - 03:09 PM

You cannot mark an Individual as private.  You can only mark a fact as Private or a note as private using the curly brackets.

 

The Living flag on the Edit person screen is what determines which people are included in a gedcom when you mark to exclude Living people.

Look at the Living flag for those you think should not have been included in the gedcom when you choose to privatize the gedcom for living people.  The Living flag should be checked for those people you wish to exclude as Living on the gedcom.
 
If there are also people with the Living flag unchecked that you don't want included in a gedcom, unmark them on the Select from a List, Select people screen.

The choices for private facts and private notes only includes or excludes private facts or notes for the persons included in the gedcom.

There is no way to exclude a person from reports that can't be filtered by Select from a list or a Group.
 
If you want to exclude a person from reports that cannot be filtered do not include them in a gedcom and import the gedcom into a new database or Drag and Drop into a new database and use Select from list and mark the people to include and unmark the people to exclude.
 
 

 



#3 chignecto

chignecto

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 27 September 2014 - 03:39 PM

Laura:

 

Thanks for the input.  I am, however, wondering a bit about your assessment of the notion of private.  Since I am new to RM, perhaps I am just not understanding.

 

If I open and "Edit Person" screen in my database, for an individual who has parents, and while in that screen, I highlight one of the parents, I can then edit the relationship.  For example, in order to record whether or not the child was adopted or a birth child.  On that screen, there is a check box marked "pirvate".  Now, this may well be for the birth event, but presumably if one makes this private, then the individual ought not to show up in the family in reports and gedcoms, regardless of whether they are living or not.  Or am I completely wrong in this regard.  

 

This certainly would be a case where contextual help could be of assistance.

 

Don 



#4 Laura

Laura

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4276 posts

Posted 27 September 2014 - 04:18 PM

At the present time, the Private box for Spouses and Parents on a person's Edit person screen does nothing.  I don't know why the Private boxes are there. Perhaps, it is an over sight on Bruce's part.  I hope Bruce takes them off the screen until they perhaps serve some purpose in a future version.

 

In the present and previous versions of RootsMagic, the only thing that controls which persons excluded in a gedcom when choosing to exclude Living people is whether the Living flag is checked or unchecked on each person's Edit person screen.



#5 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 7702 posts

Posted 29 September 2014 - 11:24 AM

At the present time, the Private box for Spouses and Parents on a person's Edit person screen does nothing.  I don't know why the Private boxes are there. Perhaps, it is an over sight on Bruce's part.  I hope Bruce takes them off the screen until they perhaps serve some purpose in a future version.

 

In the present and previous versions of RootsMagic, the only thing that controls which persons excluded in a gedcom when choosing to exclude Living people is whether the Living flag is checked or unchecked on each person's Edit person screen.

 

Confirming issue with private check boxes for spouses and parents being displayed is in our tracking system. 

 

Confirming enhancement request to mark people private and exclude them from reports is in our tracking system. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#6 koornalla

koornalla

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 07:16 PM

 

Confirming issue with private check boxes for spouses and parents being displayed is in our tracking system. 

 

Confirming enhancement request to mark people private and exclude them from reports is in our tracking system. 

Hi Renee,

 

What is the status of this enhancement request? I am trying to hide the relationship of an adopted child to his natural mother as it is a bit of a sensitive issue to my paternal family. In fact I don't think many (if any) of the family know about this parent/child relationship!!

 

 

Wayne Thurley



#7 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 7702 posts

Posted 24 April 2017 - 07:19 AM

Development doesn't release their schedule so I don't know. I do know everything has been on hold in order to to complete the TreeShare for Ancestry feature.


Renee
RootsMagic

#8 jgcordes

jgcordes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5 posts

Posted 12 June 2018 - 10:18 AM

Development doesn't realize their schedule so I don't know. I do know everything has been on hold in order to to complete the TreeShare for Ancestry feature.

 

Unfortunately as of June 2018 this is still a problem - the Private check box has no effect on an exported gedcom. It is not an option for me to exclude the relevant 2nd set of parents from the export. 

Please fix!

 

Thanks,

John Cordes



#9 jgcordes

jgcordes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5 posts

Posted 12 June 2018 - 11:05 AM

As a first time forum poster I was led by a google search to a thread in the v6 forum concerning a problem I have encountered. I made the mistake (I guess?) of responding there, not noticing at first that it was for v6 and not v7. Probably hardly anyone will notice it there, so I'd like to repeat the comment I made there.

 The issue is that for a 2nd set of parents (for example because of adoption), there is a check box shown allowing Private to be checked. The hope I, and others, have is that this would prevent those parents from being exported in a gedcom, assuming of course that in the Export dialog "Include private facts" is not checked. 

 Unfortunately this doesn't work -- the extra set of parents is still exported, complete with a _FREL flag marked 'step' (in my case). The discussion in the v6 forum indicated that this Private box is totally ignored in all RM reports and exports. I can at least confirm it is still a problem for the gedcom export in v7. 

 It is not an option for me to exclude the actual individuals comprising this 2nd set of parents, so this is a major difficulty which it would be great to see fixed.

 

 Thanks,

 John Cordes

 



#10 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 7702 posts

Posted 13 June 2018 - 07:46 AM

I merge this together because I think you overlooked that people are not marked private only facts. You can exclude living people with the "Privatize living people" option in the GEDCOM but that would exclude all living people. To exclude people you do not want use "Select from list" under "People to export". Make sure those you do not want included are unchecked. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#11 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3053 posts

Posted 13 June 2018 - 08:25 AM

Development doesn't realize their schedule.......

 

Couldn't resist but this has always been my problem with development :D

 

As a first time forum poster I was led by a google search to a thread in the v6 forum concerning a problem I have encountered. I made the mistake (I guess?) of responding there, not noticing at first that it was for v6 and not v7. Probably hardly anyone will notice it there, so I'd like to repeat the comment I made there.

 

I can see some logic to creating a new thread for a new version providing all issues in the previous version have been ironed out but sadly that is rarely the case. I know of several "issues" which have rolled on through several versions without being dealt with and these seems to be logical needs and breaks in functionality for many users. Searching Google is the best approach and if it is on an old thread then I generally copy the url on the old post to the new post for the benefit of others.


"Never, for the sake of peace and quiet, deny your own experience or convictions"

— Dag Hammarskjold

 

Current user of Rootsmagic version 7.5.7.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 and Legacy 7.5 on Win 10

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#12 jgcordes

jgcordes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5 posts

Posted 13 June 2018 - 11:24 AM

I merge this together because I think you overlooked that people are not marked private only facts. You can exclude living people with the "Privatize living people" option in the GEDCOM but that would exclude all living people. To exclude people you do not want use "Select from list" under "People to export". Make sure those you do not want included are unchecked. 

 

Thank you. Assuming this was intended as a response to my post (dated June 12/18), it doesn't appear to address the main issue I raised. As I said, I do not want to exclude any individuals from the export, I just want to have their appearance as a 2nd set of parents excluded. I'd have thought that was the point of the checkbox marked 'Private' in the screen for that 2nd set of parents, but checked or not doesn't seem to affect the resulting gedcom file. 



#13 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 7702 posts

Posted 13 June 2018 - 12:35 PM

Had to fix that typo!  I was debating splitting things out and making a new thread. But, then I would loose all the earlier comments that applied to it.

 

jgcordes, Marking the adoption fact private will not remove a relationship link. It only removes the fact. If you want the 2nd set of parents in the GEDCOM but not linked to that child then you need to fix it in the database before making the GEDCOM. Right click on the child and unlink them from the 2nd set of parents. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#14 jgcordes

jgcordes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5 posts

Posted 13 June 2018 - 12:59 PM

Had to fix that typo!  I was debating splitting things out and making a new thread. But, then I would loose all the earlier comments that applied to it.

 

jgcordes, Marking the adoption fact private will not remove a relationship link. It only removes the fact. If you want the 2nd set of parents in the GEDCOM but not linked to that child then you need to fix it in the database before making the GEDCOM. Right click on the child and unlink them from the 2nd set of parents. 

 

Renee - I am not questioning your statement about 'private' being for facts only and not for people. It appears that RM is not able to deal properly with this situation. As I have repeatedly said, excluding the individuals who are the "2nd parents" is not an option -- they are all part of the extended family. I still do not know why the check-box for 'private' appears on the 2nd parents screen (I was only trying to mark private the 'fact' that they were the 2nd parents, not to exclude them as individuals), but leaving that aside it appears my only recourse is a bit of post-processing of the gedcom file. That would be simple if there was only one such family situation involved -- I'll have to consider my options further.



#15 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2931 posts

Posted 13 June 2018 - 01:47 PM

Another option (and one which is probably easier than post-processing your GEDCOM) is to make a copy of your RM database. In this copy, unlink the extra parents, create the GEDCOM, and then delete the second copy of your database. I'm assuming that you want the extra parents to be included in the GEDCOM and that you just don't want them linked in the GEDCOM.

 

Jerry



#16 jgcordes

jgcordes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5 posts

Posted 13 June 2018 - 01:53 PM

Jerry - Thank you for this suggestion. It is something I did do to overcome this problem a few months ago, and indeed it does accomplish what I was aiming for. I was just trying to find out if there was a more 'built-in' way in RM to do it.  You are right, I just don't want that second set of parents linked in the gedcom file.