Jump to content


Vyger

Member Since 18 Nov 2005
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 12:58 PM
*****

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Treeshare creates duplicate sources in RM

Yesterday, 09:27 AM

Okay, I guess this is in the too hard basket??

 

I know the Rootsmagic duplicate Source utility needs improvement but for my interest could you take the Source and Citation stats from Properties (when duplication is prolific) and then run all Rootsmagic Automatic Merges, Source Merge and compare properties afterwards just to see?

 

I know you don't want to be doing that all the time but it would be an interesting test of how well Rootsmagic can or cannot handle exact duplication.

 

Duplication is becoming a REAL problem and needs REAL soultions imo.


In Topic: Observation on genealogy software...RM best on....

Yesterday, 06:09 AM

I remember him well :D only 20 miles up the road from me.

 

The majority of my research is in Ireland and in your case "Ballymena" is quite a broad brush, you will know that modern day Ballymena is shared between 4 parishes, Ahoghill, Ballyclug, Connor and Kirkinriola although in 1823 more likely Ahoghill and Kirkinriola with a possibility of Ballyclug. Each of those parishes have numerous townland divisions which have remained reliable land divisions for hundreds of years so you will maybe uncover a record stating your ancestor was from Brocklemont and at that time he would have been distinguished as James Gillan from Brocklemont as opposed to another James Gillan from another part of the Ballymena area.

 

I rely a lot on these geographic indicators and the accurate geocoding of them which transcends the infinite variations of how users prefer to record their Places for reasons of appearance or reporting and also the home language of the researcher. For me those pins in the map are the important indicators to communities, congregations, places of work etc. and vital clues where other information is often very scant. Apart from the text recording of these important locations being all over the place with no hope any agreement or standard, the pins on the map do not move, they are the only standard regardless of what you call that location. So in simple terms your ancestor from "Ballymena" another researchers ancestor from "Old Galgorm Road, Ballymena" and my ancestor from "Brocklemont" all in 1843 have completely different Place notations but when geocoding is examined and mathematics applied they all existed within 1 mile of each other.

 

Ancestry and the likes have no apparent interest in precise locations and I am saddened when I see users trying to move more towards those online systems. I would hope genealogy software does the opposite and moves towards those wishing to do serious research with proven facts otherwise genealogy will just become fictions versions “I saw it on the internet”

 

I just wanted to say I typed your ancestors name as "Gillen" throughout this post and only realized and corrected after proofing it, that’s obviously how I understand the name to be spelt and as you know how name spelling changed throughout time, thank goodness for Rootsmagic Alternate Name.

 

brocklemont.JPG


In Topic: Problem with images

15 August 2018 - 01:24 PM

Oh, that is cool. I am working on that. I'll see what happens.

 

I was wondering did Twigs find a resolution to the difficulties, so many threads are started and never concluded.


In Topic: Observation on genealogy software...RM best on....

15 August 2018 - 10:14 AM

Bonnie,

 

I chimed in as your post was on genealogy software but on reflection we may see the prime purpose of genealogy software and computing power in different ways although there is room for all and each research tool compliments another.

 

I agree with proper documentation and sourcing but I see genealogy software as much more of a research driving tool, not simply a notation system. During my 25+ years of researching correct and concise source documentation never helped me prove a family link but of course proved very helpful in directing me back to the original documentation for further review. Maybe the one exception to that is a particular family name within a collection of a particular Church records where the association becomes the community and congregation.

 

The point I was trying to make is that as we progress back through time the elements of proof become ever weaker, Name and Date are valuable but pretty worthless without an accurate location. That is where I refer to the DNA of locations, one might have a John Doe baptism where the only detail is the father’s name of William, so we have the existence of William Doe, an approximated timeframe but importantly a location. Now Williams brother light live 1 mile up the trail but that location could be a different County, even a different Country but the proximity is indicative of a possible family association.

 

All that ignores the never ending personal variations of how locations are recorded, historic or modern, borough or not, County or no County, USA, U.S.A or United States, Place Details or no Place Details, the variations are endless yet the pin(s) in the map remains the same or in close proximity. That, I believe, is the real challenge of genealogy software and where processing power should be aimed towards suggesting possible associations, a simple notation system required little processing power and is fairly wasteful of potential.

 

Best wishes


In Topic: Observation on genealogy software...RM best on....

14 August 2018 - 06:13 AM

The trend is more and more away from the hobbyists towards sound research, proving the ancestors. DNA has nudged this trend too.

 

I would like to believe this trend exists but I fear the opposite.

 

I would like to judge myself as a serious researcher and often describe the DNA of Locations which I would hope becomes more obvious as a valuable research indicator. Sadly the likes of Ancestry seem to have zero interest in the actual location of a community regardless of how you name it, whether County, Parish, Administrative division or even Country for that matter and I worry Rootsmagic may move more towards the wants of the many rather than the needs of serious researchers. I read often of users modifying their data input more and more to suit Ancestry alignment which often departs from accuracy and Ancestry pays no attention to the actual geocoding, probably no money in it.