ketchell

Jerry, yes I am a lumper. In RM I can make citation details create an exact EE style, but in TMG I do not split the CD so would need to redo most citations after import into RM. Currently my CD in TMG imports into RM and exports out to Gedsite with a close but not exact EE style. Will probably stick with that for now, and leave a massive overhaul after pruning sources and finding better sources with original images that were not available when I started years ago.

In response to Jerry about GedSite sentence structure. Yes, I do all my sentence structure formatting in GedSite now. RM does not transfer witness/role sentences. I decided rather than to upkeep both TMG and RM sentences for the short term, I would rely instead on GedSite which is wonderfully flexible. John Cardinal said he will probably have GedSite direclty import TMG data. That solves the problem of sentences for me and I will keep sentence structure separate from TMG or RM at that point. I had to retain sentences in TMG for SS, but with a TMG/GedSite, I can just do sentences in only GedSite. I am only interested in web presentation because of the flexiblity of GedSite. Also, building on top of your idea of minimalist sentences works great in GedSite (sentence construction) as I have given up on narrative sentences and use the 3 column format which is much easier to read. Minimalist sentences and GedSite make all this much simpler and easier. The best reading website I have found is http://www.ramblingr.../RYB-p/p239.htm- it incorporates the minimalist sentence and uses the note for the details that make family history interesting. It also summarizes to avoid repetition. This site was created in Second Site, but I can get close to the presentation look in GedSite now, and expect it will only get better as John continues development. 

 

Completely agree about separation of the data vs presentation. What I'm working on now is cleaning up 30 years of data that has already gone through 2 program deaths to be more flexible and portable based on ideas that you, Tom and others have shared on the forum. Very helpful for those of us thinking through new processes and practices 20 years later. I'm finding that the rethink required to clean up TMG data to RM migration for the future and ideas about gedcom transfer factor in.

 

My most difficult challenge right now is how to create EE-like citations using either the TMG or RM  model. From experts like you-all, I decided to stick with a single citation details field as I currently use that model (no split CDs) in TMG. I'm still a lumper so looking for a method style that will transport from TMG to RM and into GedSite. In TMG and RM you simply cannot construct a EE style narrative with splitting the CD/CitationDetails. I may just end up using a modified EE (like where the access date is placed) which includes all the information but in a slightly different order. 

I should note for other TMG users that Tom's SQL fixes are also critical. He created an author reverse as the default in TMG is the opposite of RM. Fixes like TMG person ID to be the RM RIN was also critical to me as I had used that number as further ID for a person in my storage of documents. Big thanks to Tom for the SQL query fixes!

Posting this as fyi for other TMG users. A year later I still use TMG as my primary database. I have and will continue to do major cleanup of how I use TMG for a cleaner import into RM for a permanent future move. Currently I only import into RM to use Gedsite to create a website. If you use Second Site, Gedsite is the answer for future proofing website creation. My solution is to use Gedsite sentence structure (minimalist style per Jerry Bryan, many thanks on idea), and the display looks good with a few tweaks as Gedsite interprets TMG data that RM does not. John Cardinal is working on Gedsite to import TMG directly. This would simplify my future proofing by eliminating Second Site, and further my goal to cleanup my TMG database to be more generic. I read this forum diligently to discover how RM long time users keep their data gedcom flexible and more generic for importing across programs.

Specific to the numbering of sources, just like Jerry Bryans minimalist sentence structure, sometimes I need to rethink my approach.

My use of TMG source numbering as my digital or paper numbering system (started years ago so not changing as prefer accession number system as a librarian) is a problem importing into RM (it doesn't import). I assume this to be the case for import into any other system. The need to retain the number with a source is critical for my original document storage. My solution was to create a sourceID element in all TMG sources. This makes my sourceID a standard source field that will export/import. This field imports just fine into RM as a source field. This actually works out better than expected. The number is part of the source record rather than a particular programs numbering system. It can be searched as a field. It can be included or not in TMG, RM or Gedsite source citations, etc. it can be exported again as gedcom to Gedsite.

I did have to reserve a TMG source element to use exclusively for the source number in each source type. As there are a limited number available in TMG that could pose a problem for some. This is not a problem in RM. As a source lumper, I touched about 1500 source records in TMG and added the source ID to each. No need to edit anything in RM on import so I can import multiple times. It took a couple of days but worth it.

Ditto original post request. Renaming all sources to find one later is not a solution. The lack of search for just within the real title or adding a source ID search would be an immense improvement in productivity vs hashing around to find the right source.