Jump to content


Photo

Burial Place report with names


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 bjenn

bjenn

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 09:06 AM

I am looking to print a burial place report that I assume would print alphabetically and then include everyone buried in each place on the report. For example Archibald England Cemetery and underneath all family attached to that burial place, then Annon Cemetery and all buried there, etc. I would assume this would be something handy but maybe nobody else has a need for somethign like this. Thanks in advance for any guidance anybody can give.



#2 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8452 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 09:10 AM

The Place List is the closest you will come. Select to "Print all places (including events)", Reverse place names and include place details. Save as an RTF file and in Microsoft Word edit out the places you don't need. 


Renee
RootsMagic

#3 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 12:12 PM

I am looking to print a burial place report that I assume would print alphabetically and then include everyone buried in each place on the report. For example Archibald England Cemetery and underneath all family attached to that burial place, then Annon Cemetery and all buried there, etc. I would assume this would be something handy but maybe nobody else has a need for somethign like this. Thanks in advance for any guidance anybody can give.

 

Many users have a need for this type of reporting but it is not a catered for report and what Renee suggested is the closest you can get.

 

It sounds like you may include the cemetery name as part of the Place instead of recording it as a Place Detail? if that is so then highlighting it in your Place List and pressing the Print button will report all Events associated with thet Place, unfortunately there is no similar Print button on Place Details.

 

I focus heavily on geocoding and mapping events including buriald down to plot level, my 12 min video linked below may give you some ideas about mapping and reporting in the future.

 

https://youtu.be/qsgG8ch4BHU


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#4 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3568 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 12:46 PM

You could also put the burial fact in People View with columns for Place and/or Place Details. You could do this same thing with Custom Reports and the burial fact with its Place and Place Details.

 

Custom Reports would come closest to what you want, I think. Set up columns for name, burial place, and burial place details (if you are using place details). Sort by place first, place details second (if you are using place details), and name last.

 

Jerry



#5 bjenn

bjenn

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 01:07 PM

I do list the cemetery name as the place rather than a detail, for example "Archibald England Cemetery, Moatsville, Barbour, West Virginia", I'm not sure that is the correct way to do it but it felt right.

 

All this info sounds very good folks, I should be able to make something work that will cover what I am looking for. Thanks as usual for all the help!



#6 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 01:22 PM

I do list the cemetery name as the place rather than a detail, for example "Archibald England Cemetery, Moatsville, Barbour, West Virginia", I'm not sure that is the correct way to do it but it felt right.

 

You will get differing opinions and they are mostly due to personal preferences and the constraints of the program, I use Place Details heavily as they serve my needs, others do as you do, for me this would make a very large Place List with entries sorted alphabetically all over the Place, example my report for Belfast, Antrim, Ireland runs to over 300 pages as seen in the video.

 

Also I feel sending "Moatsville, Barbour, West Virginia" out for hints has a better change of alpha matching than "Archibald England Cemetery, Moatsville, Barbour, West Virginia" where other users may record the cemetery name in different ways and therefore detract from the match accuracy.

 

As I say use whatever works best for your needs.


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#7 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3568 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 02:29 PM

The fundamental problem with RM's Place Details is that they are not supported by most other genealogy software. Therefore, the information is lost if ever I move my data elsewhere. I used Place Details heavily until I realized the full magnitude of the problem of losing my data when I move it to other software. I would happily use RM's Place Details if only the data loss problem could be solved.

 

Most of the problems with managing a large Place List when you don't use Place Details would be taken care of if RM's user interface for places allowed you to manage them in a largest to smallest fashion - i.e., country, state, county, city/town - even though places normally need to be printed in a smallest to largest fashion.

 

The ability to manage places largest to smallest and print places smallest to largest is badly needed, irrespective of which side of the Place Details debate you come down on. It will be interesting so see if RM8 offers any improvements in this area. We should find out in the next few months.

 

Jerry



#8 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 04:06 PM

The fundamental problem with RM's Place Details is that they are not supported by most other genealogy software.

 

For the benefit of bjenn I am in complete agreement with Jerry even though we both record our data differently, first and foremost if Rootsmagic can provide the option to append Place Details to the Place on Treeshare with Ancestry why can they not provide the same option for Gedcom output to other programs, that simple option would overcome a lot of user objections and reservations.

 

Personally I have chosen to maintain my investment in Place Details as I value the database it has allowed me to build and the benefits I am able to gain from Rootsmagic Mapping and I have maintained my faith in Rootsmagic and the developers that they will finally make good on this feature and overcome user objections. However I am now at a crossroads with Rootsmagic after 10 years of fervently wishing for improvements and must choose a program to serve my needs into the future so I eagerly await further reveals and clues to what is in store for Place management in RM8, I am not prepared to wait further and start re-submitting wishes that have been in the system for 10 years or more, that ship has sailed. I must choose a program which works best to progress my research now with speed of entry, advance filtering and reporting. If that decision is to migrate to another platform becomes necessary then I can combine my Place Details and Places to make my data compatible with other genealogy software packages and start investing in the features offered by the chosen program to better serve my needs.

 

There are many old and loyal Rootsmagic users also awaiting the full feature list of Rootsmagic version 8 and I am sure Jerry is one, from the single limited tease graphic released I can see a Places icon on the left and I will wait to see what powers are behind that button, hopefully not the present Place List. I always maintain the Golden Trinity of genealogy are Names, Dates and Places, identifying possible family links through geographic proximity is an important indicator for me. In Ireland a burial plot might contain 8 interments, or more, including cremations spenning 100 years or more. That list of interments which are the associations to the Place Details (and cannot currently be singly reported) are important family indicators in themselves with infant death grandchildren often being present in the plot so need to be recognized and easily reported.

 

Whilst I have found a workaround which currently serves me in RM7 much more needs to be delivered by the developers so I join the wait and see brigade.


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#9 zhangrau

zhangrau

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1518 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 04:14 PM

When are there too many places in a Place List?

 

I do not use Place Details for at least a few reasons (in no particular order):

1 - Having started my genealogy research in 1988, there was at that time no such concept. I don't actually know in which version of RM the Place Details became an option. My own inertia certainly was involved in deciding to not start using Place Details, whenever that happened.

2 - I use a printed version of my Place List from time-to-time to allow me to review for place duplicates, mis-spellings, or other errors. As Jerry points out, the Place Details list doesn't have a print function. That makes Place Details, at best, an inefficient way to maintain my database.

3 - I have used Family Origins and RootsMagic since the early 1990's. But I also tested other programs for various reasons over the past couple decades. Keeping my data portable is important to me. Therefore, since Place Details are not widely supported, I don't see why I would want to start using that "feature."

4 - Since I don't use Place Details, I wonder: for someone who does use them, can they start typing Elmwood Cemetery, or do they need to remember to type Picton (a town in Ontario which has an Elmwood Cemetery). I just don't visualize a simple way to navigate and explore a Place List with a whole schmeer of invisible Place Details.

 

My database has (as of today) 429,395 individuals and 57,912 places. When will there be too many people? Too many places?

 

I've developed a system within RM for documenting my Place List and reviewing it for accuracy. In my mind it's simple and straight-forward, but I'll bet it would take me multiple paragraphs to try to explain it clearly, so that will wait for another time & thread.



#10 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 04:42 PM

When are there too many places in a Place List?

 

Rootsmagic 4 was the introduction, I was an early adopter, still believe in the value and still live in hope.

 

If I say to you they lived at "123 Main Street" you will ask where, for me that is where the container of the Place comes into play as well as the benefits associated with Rootsmagic Mapping. Since you do not use Place Details I can say I find it useful to highlight any Place and see a visual representation of all events which occured within the confines of that Place, see graphic below.

So my Place List would be much smaller than yours, ~3000 entries but with many nested Place Details within those main body Places. If I enter Belfast, Antrim, Ireland then in the Place Details field I will get a predictive list of Place Details as I begin to type, the one problem you eluded to is I have to know which Place the Place Details belongs to, that being said a reversed hierarchical view on screen would overcome that difficulty. I do not share Place Details with Ancestry as they only offer another level of convolution in regards to online matches, for example the commonly known "City Cemetery" is often referred to as "Falls Road Cemetery" so distinctly different as a single string.

 

Personally I like geographic groupings to help understand family associations, therefore I will continue to use Place Details unless RM8 does not overcome the present difficulties and objections.

 

mapping-parish.png


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#11 John_of_Ross_County

John_of_Ross_County

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 661 posts

Posted 05 September 2019 - 09:34 PM

I think I posted this note about 5 or 6 years ago.  The suggestions seem to fit Jerry's and Vyger's comments earlier in this series.

-------

Proposal to implement printing of place notes

 

I have used the descriptive placename notes for a few items such as major Civil War battles or old historic battles in Old England.  However, they do not print as part of any general report. 

 

1] Add a checkbox to each placename.  The checkbox would enable printing of the place note if it exists.  If the place note for a placename is empty and the checkbox is enabled, it would be ignored.  The purpose of an unchecked box where a note exists would be for privacy of the note.  If the privacy brackets {} would work, this checkbox would not be necessary.

 

2] Add a user selection box to each report similar to [Index Options] and [Placename Options] in the Narrative Reports.  Print all placename notes referenced in this report if the checkbox for printing the place note is checked.  The placename notes would be best as a separate appendix. The placename or the expanded placename with the place detail name should be inserted as a header before each note.  The order of printout either forward or reverse should be the same as the printout of the placenames. This should work for place notes either in place details or in the older fully formed placenames.

 

3] I know that the Civil War was not a placename.  However, it works for me to use “Civil War” or “WWI” or “WWII” as placenames.  By extension, then “Civil War 149th OVI” for the 149th Ohio Volunteer Infantry works as a convenient placename for all relatives who served in that unit.  The Unit History from the National Park Service Civil War website can be added as a placename note for each unit defined as a place or as a place detail.  In conjunction with the proposed placename note appendix, this would result in just one Unit History printed no matter how many relatives listed in the report served in this unit. 

 

If you have a named cemetery with its place note, anyone included in the narrative report and buried in that cemetery would be listed following the name of the cemetery and the narrative about the cemetery as found in the place note.  This is in contrast to using the print option under “Lists” where it would print the desired placename note and everyone in the database listed for this place. [This feature would match Vyger's idea in his posting at 4:06 today.]



#12 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3407 posts

Posted 06 September 2019 - 05:39 AM

I think I posted this note about 5 or 6 years ago.  The suggestions seem to fit Jerry's and Vyger's comments earlier in this series.

-------

 

My original post was October 2012 and it was confirmed as being on the enhanement request list 7 years ago now and John did comment on that post at a leter date.

 

http://forums.rootsm...or-media-notes/


We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.0, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root