Go to the place list and highllght the place in which you are interested. Click "print," then "generate report." That should do it.
- RootsMagic Forums
- → robertjacobs0's Content
There have been 60 items by robertjacobs0 (Search limited from 25-October 19)
You can make changes to place names from the place list (Lists/Place list). Different spelling & formats can merged to a single correct one on the place list. The place names in individual fact entries will then be modified accordingly.
Doesn't this already exist? Look down in the lower left-hand corner of the screen for relationships either to Root or to whomever you've set. The facility would be strengthened if it showed relationships by marriage as well.
The dialogue to set relationships is found on the tools menu.
In Outlook, Thunderbird calendar and others, when one edits a repeating appointment, the program asks whether the change should be for the one instance or the whole series. For shared RM residence tags, and maybe others, it would be a nice feature if one could change the dates for sharers individually if desired.
Explanatory notes can also be used, I suppose: "X got a job in New York and moved out the family home in 1998."
In RM7 one thing that can be done is to design a "fostering" fact with appropriate sentences for various roles. That would at least allow informative entries in narrative reports. A was fostered by B & C. B & C fostered A. I think I prefer "raised" or "cared for" to "fostered," but English is so nice and rich that we can all devise our own.
Ultimately computer software, even flexibly programmed software, is rigid compared to the diversity of human relations. Indeed, just in the last decade or two there has been an expansion of the terms that people use for gender, accompanied by fierce controversies about the meaning and appropriateness of the lingo. Software that only allows M & F is sure to miff someone. We've already seen genealogical programs scrambling to accommodate same-sex marriage.
I have the same problem with a couple of people in my family tree. The initial WebHints popup shows nine total hints, but the subsequent screen lists only seven. So I have six confirmed, one rejected, and two pending. The two which are pending never show up on the screen which lists the actual hints.
It's an annoyance, but I've been able to ignore it for the most part — I'm assuming that it's an Ancestry API problem.
I had occasion to invoke the Who Was There List report this morning, I think for the first time. I wanted to know who was in Kansas from 1880 to 1890. The report spat out the Kansas events — and also Arkansas events. I can see how this happened and why the search may have produced it. I'm wondering if there's any way to avoid it.
Exactly. As I understand it, RM7 is already putting non-standard entries into its GEDCOMs when the "RM specific details" box is checked on the GEDCOM output screen. John Cardinal's GedSite program utilizes them extensively. The addition I am suggesting will make it easier to prepare smooth narratives in GedSite, GedSite Publisher, and possibly in other programs still to come.
The RM short place name problem is that the reporting program — in this case GedSite — is that it cannot know from the standard place name (e.g., Bronx, Bronx County, New York, United States) how the short name has been defined by the RootsMagic user. That's why it would be so helpful for RM to output the short name in its GEDCOMS when the short name exists. There are too many possibilities: Bronx, New York; the Bronx; Bronx, NY, USA . . . etc.
In general, if I may say so, I do not think that a "standard" can be devised which will accommodate all the vagaries of human taste and experience. Of the genealogical programs I've used (UFT, TMG, RootsMagic), TMG seemed to me to offer the most powerful means of standardizing place names. The next step up would have been free-form. That's all very well within one program, but the moment one expects some other program to interpret free-form transfers accurately, one is in for trouble.
If free-form is the "standard" one may as well use a typewriter as a computer.