This valid repeat of software limitations appeared yesterday on the Rootsmagic Facebook Group which I don't believe is the best area for constructed discussion so I'm updating this thread so the original poster can benefit from previous discussions;
"There are quite a few places in and around Hungary that changed names and countries through time (thinking of the last 150 years). As an example: there was Párkány, Esztergom, Hungary, then the same city was called Štúrovo, Nitriansky, Czechoslovakia, and now it's Štúrovo, Nové Zámky, Nitra, Slovakia. Now if I have persons born here in those different periods, what's the best method to use the place names? If I use the up to date name, that's not correct, as it's not even the same country. But if I add these names separately, then I'll end up 3+ names for the same city, what makes listings quite painful. How would you solve this?"
The objections are really two fold and stem from software limitations which are not only within Rootsmagic, also genealogy software developers need to remain Gedcom compliant so do have certain restrictions they need to work within. I need to qualify this discussion by restating that Rootsmagic loses Standardized and Abbreviated Place Names during Gedcom transfer at time of writing and the developers are aware of this.
Entering the historically correct Place name for the time the event took place is the only correct data entry, no one could argue differently, so why do people do otherwise?
One reason is that Rootsmagic relies on a poor and patchy Place look up source, the Gazetteer, so if it does not recognize your Place entry it will not attempt to geocode it and manual geocoding within Rootsmagic is such a painfully prohibiting process people just avoid it or don't know it is possible. That problem suggests two possible solutions, a much larger and more detailed Place reference source with the possibility of a custom user add on and drag to map geocoding functionality as present in other genealogy software.
The second and also valid objection is "people who read my reports don't recognize the Place", well firstly I see that as ignorance and an opportunity to educate the reader but could Rootsmagic or other software help overcome this limitation and reason for users entering inaccurate information? Many users who enter historically correct place names add Notes explaining the modern place name, personally I also geocode and often add old map snippets as media to further define the actual location. However there is currently no option to print such Notes or Media in the Place Index so they are not available to the reader as reference. So why not facilitate the printing of such supporting material in any report index where the Place or Place Detail has been embodied in the report? I see that as the most obvious answer and suggested the same 8 years ago.
Whilst the original Facebook poster wanted to remain historically accurate but not have 3+ entries for the same geographical location in the Place List the third reason I would cite is from a research perspective and some users may not even realize they are attempting to fulfil that need. 3+ textual entries and their associated individuals and families are essentially separate unless you consider the weight of the geocoding, one may as well be in Texas and the other in Outer Mongolia without any possible community or family connection. From a research perspective these geographic markers are important indicators and when I move my timeline slider in the mapping UI of another program I see these markers at the same point on the map regardless of Place name changes over time as the markers are derived from geocode information.
Thus far Rootsmagic has not given any indication of such a timeline date slider and I believe that would be a miss if not incorporated in RM8 mapping. I say that as a modern day event overlaid on a historical event of hundreds of years previous provides little value to my research and not really indicative at all.