Jump to content

Kevin's Content

There have been 31 items by Kevin (Search limited from 25-October 19)

By content type

See this member's

Sort by                Order  

#62753 Unknown Temple Code

Posted by Kevin on 05 March 2014 - 05:31 PM in Issues

RootsMagic does not seem to recognize the new Gilbert Temple Code of GILBE. Is there a file that can be manually edit to add the code? I would have hoped that RootsMagic would have been proactive and added the new temple codes in a updated prior to the temple being finished.

#62574 Change so true sources can be transferred to Family Tree

Posted by Kevin on 17 February 2014 - 08:10 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

I agree that this is NOT a limitation in the API. It is they way it was implemented (fields mapped) in the RootsMagic. I would also like the URL to be populated from the URL in the Detail Text, when there is no URL in the Master Text. It seems strange to me that if there is no URL in the Master Text but there is a URL in the Detail Text, that RootsMagics does not populate the URL in Family Tree. If there are URLs in both then allow the user to choose.

#58871 Possible Matches in FS is no longer working

Posted by Kevin on 14 July 2013 - 08:07 AM in FamilySearch Family Tree

I am having the exact same problem!

#58822 Family Search Tree Share Data Children Sorting

Posted by Kevin on 11 July 2013 - 03:41 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

So even though the FT API returns the children in a random (not birth) order, it is possible for RM the change order when displaying on the screen. RM has simply chosen (at least for now) not to reorder the children, and since as Renee indicated, it has been that way since NFS, it does not seem that RM is going to implement the reordering any time soon.

#58821 How to manually mark all Ordinances as complete

Posted by Kevin on 11 July 2013 - 03:36 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

I think what Tamlyn is asking for is some way to have RootsMagic override what it displays as the FT status. For example, I have a grandmother that was married for a brief time followed by a divorce (no children) and the marriage to my grandfather. In RM it shows here are ready/needing ordinances (Sealing to Spouse). We have decided as a family that we are NOT going to perform the sealing to her first husband. But in RM there is no way get rid of her always showing up in persons ready/needing ordinances and showing the little green arrow. RM magic actually allows a status of DNS (Do not Seal) but it has no affect on the FT status. I think it should.

#58653 Getting Sources from FamilySearch website

Posted by Kevin on 03 July 2013 - 05:34 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

There is already an enhancement request to use the Citation WebTag found under the Detail Text tab if there is no WebTag present in the Master Source. Hopefully this enhancement will be available shortly.

#58454 RootsMagic Notes, to FSFT Stories

Posted by Kevin on 25 June 2013 - 01:07 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

Maybe RM could copy the "Census (Family)" fact as 2 individual "Census" facts when uploading to FSFT. Just an idea.

#58399 New Source Syncing does not synch all sources

Posted by Kevin on 24 June 2013 - 05:55 AM in FamilySearch Family Tree

Instead of RM always uploading the WebTag URL associated with the Master Source can a change be implemented (fairly soon) to either allow the user to choose (Master Source or Source Detail) OR if the Master Source does NOT have a WebTag URL use the WebTag URL from the Source Detail. I think this would be of great benefit to most users since most users do NOT use extreme splitting of sources.

#58379 Inconsistent "Details" screen in "Edit Source" Window

Posted by Kevin on 22 June 2013 - 12:35 PM in Discussion

I think the difference is between the following once you are in the Citation Manager:
If you first Select "Cite Existing Source" and Then Select "Add New Source" then you do NOT get the detail entry information.
If you first Select "Add New Source" then you DO get the chance to enter the detail information.

#58354 Copy Source from RM to FT - Does not copy URL WebTag

Posted by Kevin on 21 June 2013 - 02:20 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

Can I suggest that if the Master Source does NOT have a WebTag that the Web Tag from the Source Detail be Attached, or even let the user choose. I understand that the Source in FT is not attached to a specific fact but in general the WebTag associated with the SourceDetail is probably more useful (probably person specific) than the WebTag associated with the MasterSource which would generally be an entire book, webSite (e.g. findAGarge), a database (e.g. "Wiscon Birth Records 1800-1900") on a webSite (e,g, Ancestry.com or FamilySearch.org), etc.

Of coure is one is use Extreme Splitting of sources the current approach works fine, but I guess that most people are not using Extreme Splitting.

#58335 Family Trees

Posted by Kevin on 21 June 2013 - 11:27 AM in FamilySearch Family Tree

The initial tree came from many different sources that FamilySearch had access to, including submitted GEDCOMs. Some of the initial merging was performed automatically, addtional merging has been peformed as people 'cleanup' their ancestors and find duplicates.

You can login to family search and perform a search to see if your ancestors are there. You could do that from either going to the WebSite or from RM by selecting an individual and see if it finds a match on FT.

#58326 Family Trees

Posted by Kevin on 21 June 2013 - 09:28 AM in FamilySearch Family Tree

First of all, as I stated there is only one tree. When people upload information they should NOT blindly upload their entire RM database/tree, this can cuase many duplicates and then requires the individuals to be merged. They should attempt to match individuals between FT and RM. If the person already exists in FT then simply create the link and then share any data desired. Only upload a new person if and only if the person is NOT already in FT. The 'trees do NOT automatically merge'.

If there is a disagreement then a discusssion (hopefully backed up sources) should take place between the persons involved to come to a concensus (maybe both are incorrect). Just as in RM, FT allows mutiple entries for events when there is conflicting information from the sources.

#58318 Family Trees

Posted by Kevin on 21 June 2013 - 05:32 AM in FamilySearch Family Tree

I think the biggest difference is that for FSFT there is only a single tree. There should only a single entry for an individual in the entire tree so that there is no duplication. In AFT, people create their own trees and a person my be found on potentially hundreds of trees, so there is much duplication.

Because of this anybody and change almost anything on FSFT, so people can change info that you input on your family, because the person also belongs to someone else's family also. I have been using FSFT for a long time and have 'cleaned up' a lot of things related to my ancestors. I have never had anyone change something on my relatives that I did not agree with. The information seems to get more accurate and full as time goes along with so many people being able to provide information.

#58311 Copy Source from RM to FT - Does not copy URL WebTag

Posted by Kevin on 20 June 2013 - 05:13 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

Family Tree allows sources to be URL, especially when the URL is to information on FamilySearch. For each of my citations for a source I have a WebTag on the DetailText Tab that has the URL of the source. When I copy a citation/source from RM to FT, the WebTag URL is not copied. When copying the source from RM to FT please allow the URL from the WebTag to also be copied. The user could prompted if they want the URL copied or not.

#58289 RootsWeb 6 and Family Search issues with ordinances

Posted by Kevin on 18 June 2013 - 10:23 AM in FamilySearch Family Tree

I appreciate all the RM does, but I do disagree with previous statement 'just not possible to get family facts...'. It is possible, since I can manually do it by going back myself and downloading the Family Events (Marriage, and LDS Sealing for example). Since I can do it in RM with a few extra clicks (annoying a prone to forget), and other competing software does it automatically, I think it is possible. It is just the RM has chosen not to do it. That is a valid business decision and should be stated as such vs stating 'just not possible to get family facts...'

#58284 Short Foot Note Issue

Posted by Kevin on 18 June 2013 - 08:42 AM in Discussion

Tom I am curious as to what information you place in the 'Details' field in an !MyFreeForm3 entry, when Key also contains data, since the Details would then have a good change of never being displayed in any footnote. Could you give a couple of examples?

#58273 Shared Census Facts - Not finding

Posted by Kevin on 17 June 2013 - 10:20 AM in Issues

If I want to find all persons that were listed in a specific county during a specific census, it does not seem to work when shared census facts are used. It only seems to find those people to whom the census fact is the primary fact, not those to which it is shared. This seems like a bug.

#58272 RootsWeb 6 and Family Search issues with ordinances

Posted by Kevin on 17 June 2013 - 10:16 AM in FamilySearch Family Tree

I think this a bug. When one adds the spouse from FT to RM it should automatically download the family events if both persons are now linked to FT. Why make the user take extra steps. I found this very annoying and quite frequently forget to download the Family events since the individual events are downloaded automatically. I do think that the family events should only be downloaded automatically when both persons are linked between RM and FT.

#58241 Short Foot Note Issue

Posted by Kevin on 14 June 2013 - 08:24 PM in Discussion

It seems to me that the Short Footnote must contain all the Source Details as the Footnote. I have tested using Source Templates as well as the !MyFreeForm3.

For example (All Citations are using the SAME source and the !MyFreeFrom3):

Master:Footnote Field contains "FootNote"
Master:Short Footnote field contains "SFootNote"

Citation #1:
Details field contains "Details"
Key field contains "Key"

Citation #2:
Details field contains "Details2"
Key field contains "Key2"

EndNotes on Report:
1. FootNote, Details, Key
2 SFootNote, Key2

Because Citation #2 is same source as #1, Short Footnote is printed for #2 but the the Details field is missing. So if I have 100 different citations that all use the same source (all referencing different people (the Key) for example), the Details field is almost meaningless because it only show for the 1st Citation and not for the other 99 even though all 100 are different.

Of course this is not a problem if using Extreme Splitting of Sources.

#57892 RM6 FamilySearch Person Tool

Posted by Kevin on 15 May 2013 - 07:28 AM in FamilySearch Family Tree

Family Tree DOES show all the 20+ items. Click on the Edit Couple link and you will see the following.

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]arriage
    ABT 1720
    ,, Virginia[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT 1719
    , Prince George, VA[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT 1720[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Henrico Co, VA[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    , Prince George, Virginia, Usa[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Abt 1688
    ,, Va[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Abt 1720
    , Prince George, Virginia, USA[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Prince George,Va[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Abt 1715
    of Dinwiddie Co., Virginia[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Abt 1716
    ,, Va[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT 1692
    probably, VA[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT 1712
    Prince George Co., Va.[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT 1715
    Dinwiddie, VA[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT 1717
    , Prince George, Virginia[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT 1717
    ,, Virginia[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT 1718
    , Prince George, Virginia[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    ABT. 1719
    Prince George Cty, Va.[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Abt 1695[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Abt 1888
    ,, Va[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Prince George Co., VA[/url]

  • [url=""%20style="color:%20rgb(0,%2081,%20196);%20text-decoration:%20none;%20word-wrap:%20break-word;"]Marriage
    Int 1692 (Wft Est. 1692-1736)
    , Prince George, VA[/url]

#57643 Adventures in Extreme Splitting

Posted by Kevin on 23 April 2013 - 04:11 PM in Discussion

Ancestral Quest actually has this feature, allowing the same citation (not a copy and paste) to be used as a source for multiple facts. This also has the advantage of all the references to the citation using the Same footnote number which avoids duplication and clearly indicates they are all based on the same source.

#57370 reassigning ordinances

Posted by Kevin on 09 April 2013 - 10:22 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

Login to Family Tree via your Web Browser and reassign to yourself.

#57333 RM

Posted by Kevin on 08 April 2013 - 06:37 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

Updating Temple ordinance data was not eliminated, it was just made much more difficult requiring extra key strokes. You now must go to the Ordinance Tab instead of the Share Data tab. Then you must select 'Add to My File' Then select the appropriate ordinances to copy. Be careful not to select ordinances that are already in RM because it will cause duplicates. Also beware that the ordinances do NOT line up as one has come to expect in Share Data so it is not obvious which ordinances must be copied. In addition there is not a Replace option so selected ordinances facts are always created when selected allowing duplicates to easily be created.

#57196 Access to FamilySearch Person Tools from Cards tab

Posted by Kevin on 01 April 2013 - 04:21 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

But for people that ARE in the RM database, I agree it would sure be convenient feature. It would also be nice to sort the Cards by Gender and to have the Last Activity column be populated with the date of the most recent ordinance performed. It seems the Last Activity is always blank. Also when the 'i' is pressed it displays a Large image of the card without any useful data. It should display the date of the completed ordinances.

#57126 Family Tree Beta 6.1.0: No shared facts on comparison screen

Posted by Kevin on 27 March 2013 - 08:19 PM in FamilySearch Family Tree

I know that other programs (including FT) don't support shared events. I was simply suggesting the ability to copy the event to FT as a regular (non-shared event) even though it is a shared event in RM