Jump to content


Photo

Sort by birth date


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 SomebodySmart

SomebodySmart

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 82 posts

Posted 24 November 2018 - 02:26 PM

I am compiling the birth records of my ancestral Italian town, now that I have compiled the marriage records in that lineage-linked database. Each time I add a birth, typically I lose time having to re-arrange the children in order of birth date. You need an automatic feature that goes through every family group in a database and sorts the children by birthdate.



#2 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8029 posts

Posted 24 November 2018 - 04:27 PM

Confirming this is on the enhancement request list. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#3 John_of_Ross_County

John_of_Ross_County

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 626 posts

Posted 24 November 2018 - 04:51 PM

Please don't make it automatic.  There is already an option for a given family to sort by birth order.  The problem with an automatic sort is that there may be evidence of birth order without specific birth dates.  An automatic feature as requested would disable carefully selected birth order.



#4 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3173 posts

Posted 24 November 2018 - 05:44 PM

Please don't make it automatic.  There is already an option for a given family to sort by birth order.  The problem with an automatic sort is that there may be evidence of birth order without specific birth dates.  An automatic feature as requested would disable carefully selected birth order.

 

I'm sure such considerations are why the RM developers chose for RM to handle birth order the way it does now. However (and as I have posted before), I think you can have your cake and eat it, too. By which I mean, I think it should be possible for RM to do the initial placement of children based on their birth dates (assuming they have birth dates), and then for RM not to subsequently do any automatic reordering. Of course I'm talking about automatic ordering at initial data entry, and not automatic ordering of the whole database after the fact as this thread is suggesting. Therefore, my suggestion would not disturb any carefully selected birth order.

 

Jerry



#5 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3225 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 01:06 PM

Please don't make it automatic.  There is already an option for a given family to sort by birth order.  The problem with an automatic sort is that there may be evidence of birth order without specific birth dates.  An automatic feature as requested would disable carefully selected birth order.

 

I think I may know the answer to this concern but would like to ask, why would children be arranged in any order other than Birth date?

 

I approximate a birth date for every individual in my database regardless of how crude, as these become refined automatically sorting would save me time and extra clicks. I'm asking because we all research differently and perhaps there are other tricks users employ which may have a better solution other than manual sorting contrary to birth order.


Nobody likes half baked food, so leave it in the oven and tend to it a bit longer till it's just perfect.....

 

 

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


#6 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3173 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 05:18 PM

I similarly always include some sort of birth date, even if estimated. But my understanding is that some researchers prefer to leave the the birth date blank when it is not known. But even without birth dates, they may have some evidence of birth order other than birth dates. Hence, they want to be able to set children into a particular order without any automated process disturbing the order they have set.

 

For this reason, my suggestion is that the best way for RM to handle this situation would be to have an OPTION to use birth dates for initial ordering when individuals are first entered into the RM database - via keyboard or via GEDCOM or via FamilySearch API or via TreeShare. Then subsequently there would be no further automatic ordering of children. Therefore, any manual ordering that users have accomplished would not be disturbed.

 

I think that having birth dates, even if estimated, is pretty important for several reasons. But I confess that I go out of my way not to enter burial dates, even estimated, unless I actually have evidence for the burial date. If somebody died for example on 12 Dec 1892 and I don't know their burial date, then I don't think that entering a burial date of "after 12 Dec 1892" or "about 13 Dec 1892" is actually contributing any useful or meaningful data to my RM database.

 

Jerry



#7 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3225 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 07:28 PM

But my understanding is that some researchers prefer to leave the the birth date blank when it is not known.

 

I guessed that but an estimate birth date even 50 years out is better for calculation purposes that no birth date at all which could have occured anywhere in history.

 

I think that having birth dates, even if estimated, is pretty important for several reasons. But I confess that I go out of my way not to enter burial dates, even estimated, unless I actually have evidence for the burial date. If somebody died for example on 12 Dec 1892 and I don't know their burial date, then I don't think that entering a burial date of "after 12 Dec 1892" or "about 13 Dec 1892" is actually contributing any useful or meaningful data to my RM database.
 
I do enter aft.death date for burial dates and I know its a pretty sound assumption, sounds silly in narrative reports but I just have a mind set of leaving no dates blank. If I inform another researcher I have a John Doe in my database the next questions are always when and where. I try to enter what I know for sure or can very safely assume, a death in Ireland mostly negates a burial in USA etc., the dates are further sanity checks.

Nobody likes half baked food, so leave it in the oven and tend to it a bit longer till it's just perfect.....

 

 

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


#8 John_of_Ross_County

John_of_Ross_County

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 626 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 07:47 PM

Voyager,

 

My distant cousin Margaret W. did extensive research traveling to Maryland and Delaware in the 1940's and 1950's.  She also wrote letters. She found many relatives with recorded birthdays and placed several without recorded birthdays in between those with dates.  There must have been some reason for this order.  Margaret died some 40 years ago and I have inherited her records.  Until I try to refine the information cousin Margaret provided, I see no purpose in changing her recorded information.

 

If I apply the current birth sort order in RM to a family group, the blank dates sort to the top.  That is why I don't care for the idea of an automatic birth order sort, especially one that would sort the entire database.



#9 zhangrau

zhangrau

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1395 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 10:59 PM


If I apply the current birth sort order in RM to a family group, the blank dates sort to the top.  That is why I don't care for the idea of an automatic birth order sort, especially one that would sort the entire database.

 

In such cases, have you considered adding a Sort Date instead of a displayed date? That will allow you to sort in your preferred order, without publishing a date that you are unsure about.



#10 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3405 posts

Posted 05 December 2018 - 11:25 PM

If somebody died for example on 12 Dec 1892 and I don't know their burial date, then I don't think that entering a burial date of "after 12 Dec 1892" or "about 13 Dec 1892" is actually contributing any useful or meaningful data to my RM database.


Actually, for me, it helps in the Fact List report for Burial, as well as the Place List for a particular cemetery. Also for export purposes to other programs/conventions that might be able to employ their use as an independent data entity. Just a thought.

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#11 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8029 posts

Posted 06 December 2018 - 11:39 AM

I have a "person" in my database that controls all my unconnected trees. That way I really only have two trees in my database. I added the small unconnected trees as children to them. They are sorted alphabetically and not by birth date. So that is one reason why automatic sorting by birth date may not work for everyone. 


Renee
RootsMagic