- RootsMagic Forums
- → A Descendant's Content
A Descendant's Content
There have been 33 items by A Descendant (Search limited from 05-December 18)
I'm wondering how you cite documents that are sort of "duplicate?"
For example, suppose in researching a couples marriage, you find a marriage license, an original marriage register entry, and a later marriage register entry(one of those where they're reindexed by surname).
Another example would be finding a death certificate and a death register entry.
In both cases the different documents all come from one source technically would they not? That being the original document.
So, would you cite all these sources? If so, wouldn't that make for some pretty full source citation lists? If not, do you somehow make note that these other records exist in addition to the original or primary record?
I use a seperate Master source for each source. In the Source detail, I enter the data in the source that pertains to that individual and put a transcription of that data in the Research note.
I discuss any differences between sources in the fact note.
I can do a source report for that source and print the source details and see everyone's source detail in one place. Plus it prints in the Research note report.
If I only put the source detail in a fact note, I would have to search fact notes to find the source details and the Research note report would be basically useless.
I am not sure why how many Source details there are would be a concern given the amount of storage space on modern hard drives and flash drives.
Thanks for your input! I like hearing how others use sources, etc.
I guess what i meant by a "full citation list" could be explained in the following. If i have a couple with say 10 children and i find, to borrow my first example, a marriage license, and 2 marriage register entries for each one, and they each list their parents name, if I used each one as a source i could end up with 30 source citations for the parents name! Now if I just used the "original" source, such as the marriage license, there would be only 10. I'm not sure how i handled that previously... for some reason since I started using RootsMagic i feel like i must get everything "just right", though i know that won't happen.
When it comes to sources and master sources I guess i'm what is called a "lumper" - I prefer fewer Master sources.
I am saving the census fact to each individual and not sharing it. This fact is set to not print in a Narrative report on the Lists, Fact type list and to print for a Family Group sheet. I do have the description enabled and enter the head of household into the description for the fact linked to the other family members.
I changed my default sentence to print the description if present.
[person:first]<?[Desc]| is listed in the household of [desc]| is listed [PlaceDetails] [Place]>< on the [Date:year] census>.
I also have an Individual user defined fact, ! Shared Census, that I link to the Principal [head of household] and then share with other family members. This fact is marked to print in a Narrative report and not print in a Family Group Sheet. If I am exporting a gedcom for use in another genealogy program, I unmark the gedcom selection.
I have all the advantages of using the roles switches and can put abbreviated notes in the Sharree's notes to be included in the Role sentence when the role sentence does not end with a comma.
I'm also interested in this custom fact. How does it differ from the individual Census fact?
So, if I understand right, your individual fact prints only in the Family Group Sheet and shows the person in the household of whomever you put in the description field. So you would also have the advantage of putting the head of household as its shown in that census, not just as the default name of the person in the program.
Then the shared fact is used in a narrative report only and is printed with notes, but it would show the head of household as the default name of the [principal]?
For example, suppose you add a census fact to John Smith then share it with his daughter Jane Doe.
Then you go to Jane Doe's edit person screen and click on the shared fact.
Would it then be possible, right below or near the "share" button, to have a pop-down menu to quickly see or change the role of Jane Doe. And perhaps a button to go directly to the note for the witness, Jane Doe.
As it is, you have to go through 2 clicks to change a persons roll or access their witness note. I personally never use the witness note, as I usually forget that it's available!
My second wish probably has already been requested, but I'd like to be able to use the fields for other roles of a shared fact in a witnesses sentence. It seems that they only work in the principal's sentence.
Example - I like the way a family census fact sentence reads for the children of the couple (listing them as appearring "in the household of John and Jane Smith" or something similar) but I don't really like where the narrative report places the family census fact for the couple. So i was trying to come up with an individual fact sentence to include both of the names, but then realized it wouldn't work using role fields because the witness sentences don't seem to be able to draw names using the other witness fields.
Hopefully this all makes sense, and perhaps some good ideas or improvements may come of it!
The [OtherPerson] works if you use it in the Sharee's Role Sentence Template. The sentence will list the other witnesses sharing that fact.
Thanks Renee! I was trying it just customizing a single sentence on the edit person screen, and for some reason the change won't show on that screen. But it actually was working.
Actually, now i'm having all sorts of trouble with sharees sentences. Some of the sentences are displaying a totally different sentence than what they are supposed to, with role and gender switches being all mixed up (Male being reffered to as "her", a parent being referred to as a spouse, etc). When I click customize sentence it is displayed correctly. How is it drawing things into a sentence that aren't at all part of the template?
Also, as I mentioned above, when trying to customize a single sentence the screen won't show the changes correctly as it used to. That is, you could change switches and roles and things in that single sentence and it would show the change, but now it won't do it. I'm beginning to see why some don't use shared facts.
One of the items says that [otherpersons] now works for shared role sentences. Am i understanding this right that we can now use other the roles in the sharees sentence, not just the principal? Because if so, its not working for me!
I checked some of the other things on the list and it says the alternate name as an option on the People View has been removed. But on my people view i still have a check box to show alternate names!
The one new thing, shared events included in the "Who Was There" report, does seem to be working.
Have I done something wrong?? The version number in the About screen is current, so it seems the update did install.
Am I misunderstanding the list of updates?...
After working with it, the problem seems to be that all the sharees are showing the same sentence, no matter which role I choose. Its like I've somehow lost the ability to have more than one role in a fact. If i remove a sharee from a fact, then reattach them (making sure the role is correct) , it will change the sentence for all sharees.
Edit (again...): I created a totally new test database. I entered a husband, wife, children, and husbands father. Then I created a custom fact with 3 roles (besides Principal) with 3 different sentences. I added the fact to the main person, then shared it with his children, father, and wife. And it does the exact same thing. The sentence for the children, and husbands father, show the sentence for the wife, as she was the last one added to the share list.
So... I'm guessing its not a database problem as I created a new one. So is there something wrong with the update? Anyone else having problems like this?
EDIT: I unlinked the wife (who was one of those affected by the problem) from the family then copied her over from the old database and relinked her and that seems to have fixed the problem for her part of the report. I guess i'll just have to do this for each of the children too.
Now i'm wondering why this happened. Shouldn't you delete facts from the fact type list that are in use?
Backup your database and send me an email with that backup file attached.
Tell me which person(s) you are having trouble with and I will try to figure it out.
I sent the file.
FWIW, I created copies of both the problem file and the backup from several days ago, then (using these copies) I manually deleted each of the problem people and merged just those people in from the old file. This has fixed the problem on the narrative report, even though the facts on these people didn't change.
Perhaps you can find the problem in the original file but if not, would there be problems using this "fixed" file?
That didn't seem to do any good.
The only thing I could figure out was to drag and drop to a new database, that seemed to fix the problem, but it lost 44 unused places, 4 MM items and 88 citations.
The 44 places were listed in the unused places list.
I will have to leave it up to the SQL people to do any more with it.
I am too old and dense to learn a new programming language.
Thanks for your help Alfred. I dragged and dropped to a new database. There doesn't seem to be any trouble with the place list that i can tell. As for multimedia items and citations i was reworking those anyway.
I supppose the moral of the story is to DO A BACKUP FREQUENTLY! I should've known better... Now departing to backup my database!
EDIT: Oh, I see now you meant it lost the unused places. That's totally fine as I delete them anyway.
If it says that then you have the wrong date on the census.
But if the census date is correct, you probably do not have any other family facts listed for that family, not even a marriage fact.
I am assuming that the husband is the descendant if this is a descendant report, in the ancestor reports the husband is always listed first.
So, the husband's personal facts are listed, then the family facts and finally the spouse's personal facts. If the census is the only family fact then it will immediately precede the wife's birth date.
(Personally, I think there should be a paragraph break there, between the family facts and the spouse's personal facts, as there is between the first spouse and the family facts.)
The census date was correct, and this family has a good bit of information. Anyway the problem didn't go away when i deleted the census fact.
It was printing the birth information at the very beginning in a census sentence, then following it with the proper birth sentence. The narrative report started with the husband, who was the one i put the fact on, then shared it with his wife and children. The problem didn't occur on the husband and I had been looking at narrative report at various stages before this and it was fine.
After thinking about it i think I figured out what I did that may have caused it.
I had created a custom census fact, with rolls for wife and children, and i had attached this to the principal (the husband) then shared it with his wife and the children who were with them in the census. Later i decided not to use this custom fact after all, so i deleted it from the Fact Type List, knowing that it would remove it from this family.
That seems to be what caused the trouble, as this unwanted beginning birth sentence is using the custom census sentence which i deleted. And this problem did not affect the 2 children who did not have the fact shared with them.
Hopefully I explained that properly.
I didn't see any double birth information, I saw that she appeared on the census with her husband on the same date as her birth date.
So I don't understand what is going on or where the problem is coming from.
Importing and merging another copy of that one family will probably only make things more complicated.
Without seeing your database I cannot guess what is happening. But, could it be that you have edited some sentence templates?
Yes that's how it looks. That she appeared in a census when she was born.
But there is no fact that would create this sentence. It happened after I deleted the custom Census fact I had created, and it affected only those children with whom the fact had been shared.
So in their Edit Person screen the only fact with their birth date and place is their birth fact. The sentence for the birth fact is still correct and it prints after this sentence that appears to show someone in a census at their birth.
So, for example, instead of the first sentence being "Jane Smith was born in Maryland, on 6/10/1841", Its printing "Jane Smith appeared in the household of her husband, in the census 6/10/1841 in Maryland". THEN, the next sentence shows "she was born in Maryland, on 6/10/1841". And it does use the lowercase pronoun as shown here. So for some reason its doing a double birth fact, with one being a census.
It doesn't do it for the husband of the family, only the wife and certain children. And its only this family.
I have been experimenting with various census facts and this sentence that is printing is one of my custom fact sentences, but i was only working with census facts. I'm not really sure what i did to cause this. It seems to have happened after i added a census fact for 1860 census, as the problem didn't affect the one child that fact wasn't shared with. I deleted the census facts for the family but it didn't fix it.
Anybody have any ideas??
To get the required effect, you actually have to add the spacing characters at the end of the fact note rather than the beginning. So the fact note for fact #1 creates the paragraph for fact #2, the fact note for fact #2 creates the paragraph for fact #3, etc. If the fact note is otherwise blank, all it contains is two occurrences of the CR/LF sequence. Striking the Enter key one time on the PC keyboard enters one occurrence of the CR/LF sequence. As you might suspect, I have tons of fact notes that contain only the double CR/LF sequence and the note looks blank to the eye in the note editor. It's only when you print out a report that the purpose of the double CR/LF sequence really becomes manifest.
Okay that's what I figured you meant
What if you don't actually have anything written in your note? Is it just used for the special spacing then?
I guess our output largely determines what approach we use.
So, the first paragraph would have their basic birth, marriage, (and perhaps birth info of spouse), then death and burial info. Then a new paragraph starts the rest of the narrative. In Rootsmagic the narrative is all chronological, unless i've missed something.
So the wish is... would it be possible to have some option you could check/uncheck on the narrative report to print BMD facts first?
I know you could do somewhat the same thing using the sort dates and rearranging the facts but that would be tedious.
Does this make sense? Does anyone else think this would be good?
I like to have control where a General note will print, so I have a user defined fact, General note, which I use instead. I can sort that fact anywhere in the fact order I want depending on what the subject of the note is.
I have never entered Spouse Family notes so have not created a user defined fact for those notes, but if I did it would be a family fact.
That's a great idea Laura! In this particular case, the note I had in was about the children of the focus couple, and having nowhere else to put it I just put it in as a family note. Your idea makes it possible to place it elsewhere.
I finally got to try the user defined paragraph out, and I really like it.
I did find that I need two facts, 1 individual and 1 family. I like to have returns between the end of the marriage and family facts and the spouse's individual data, and I needed the family paragraph fact sorted after the family data to do that.
I also played around a little with sharing the individual paragraph fact by sharing the Witness role with that sentence just having the returns. I'm not sure just when I might want to do that yet.
Hi Laura, I'm glad my idea is of use to others!
I hadn't thought of making a family fact with this trick. I just tried it and one problem I found is that if you use this family fact AND have family notes, it will put the new paragraph before the notes. Then the family notes will still proceed right into the spouse info.
So, what I was doing to separate the family info/notes and the spouse info is to put my individual fact at the very beginning of the spouse's fact, that is, sort it before their birth. However, if you then print a narrative report, using that spouse in the direct line, it will mess up their first paragraph, since they're the primary individual.
So your idea of a family fact is best for separating the spouse from the family info at least when there is no family note. Its also great because it will work both ways - you can print a narrative with either spouse in the direct line and the family info will still be separated from spouse info.
I recently developed this method for creating a new paragraph before a fact sentence - I created a new fact and called it "New Paragraph". I did not enable the description, date, or place fields, and it would only be included in narrative reports(though I suppose it would need to be included in a GEDCOM if the recipient wanted the report to have your custom paragraphs). For the "sentence" I just put 2 returns, then 4 spaces with the spacebar. The returns put the next fact as the start of a new paragraph and the 4 spaces indent it the same amount as the other normal paragraphs. To all appearances it seems to work. You place it where you want using the sort date.
Perhaps it would later prove to cause some problems, I don't know. Just working thorugh ideas!
Hmm.. your're right RM doesn't indent any paragraphs! I think what I was seeing was the persons very first paragraph following their number. Since there's a number first it is somewhat indented. So i guess you wouldn't need the 4 spaces. I realized i was getting 5 spaces that's what i intended when i saw that it added a space on its own. I had wanted it to match what i thought was its own indenting...
I think the wish has already been stated on the forum to have the ability to force a new paragraph whenever we want it.