I know I'm off topic here, but I'm curious as to what the "_" at the beginning of each repository reference in sentence template does.
- RootsMagic Forums
- → karibeth61's Content
There have been 26 items by karibeth61 (Search limited from 24-September 19)
Ancestor Narrative report with 0 generations will get just that person with no family facts, spouse, children or parents.
This is great. Thanks, Renne. Didn't think this would work since the system keeps wouldn't allow a "0" entry, but it did the job.
Still wish there was a narrative for the family, though.
When a change is made to a person's name it the timeline view, it is not automatically updated in the sidebar index. I came across this while changing the spellings of the last name of each family member whose surname had been entered incorrectly. I chose to use the timeline view to make these changes so that I didn't have to bring up each person's edit screen.
After discovering this, I went into one of the individual's edit screen and confirmed that the changes did take effect. I also tried it with the given name while in the timeline view and had the same result - no change to the index.
I'm sure that this request has been made before, but I couldn't find it...
I am in the process of merging together two files, but I'm finding as I merge two people together that unless the facts match perfectly word for word, it duplicates the fact. Since there is no way to merge the facts I either have to edit the facts before merging the people or merge the people then copy/paste the sources to the fact I want to keep before deleting the duplicate. It would be nice to have a merge facts feature in the person edit screen.
I tried doing this using the Compare files but if the names were different in any way then people wouldn't get matched and I didn't see anyway to select the person to be matched so I ended up importing the file from a GEDCOM.
Another feature that would be extremely helpful is the ability to mass change fact types. For example, in the merging process I am finding both Military and Military Service fact types; Illness and Medical; etc. Unfortunately running reports and manually changing these is going to be quite time consuming.
The Narrative Report would actually work quite well for this, but you can't do this for single individual without getting family facts and, at the very least, the spouse's facts, forcing you to edit the report in another program. I would love to have the ability to print the report for just a single person (with or without spouse/family info). Being able to run a narrative report for a single family without all of the individual facts (save perhaps each individual's birth and death) would be a blessing, too.
Of course I realize the same data can be extracted in the Individual Summary and Family Group Sheet, but it's not in narrative form and personally it bugs me that the notes are put at the end of the reports, almost like they are afterthoughts, instead of immediately following their associate fact. Unfortunately, all genealogy programs I've used do this.
Like Vyger I have always used the description field of the death fact for cause of death, but I understand this is a personal preference and agree no program should assume that a user wants to merge any facts. I would also caution RM when moving anything to the description field in the Death fact (also goes for birth, baptism, etc.)... many genealogy programs don't accept descriptions for "vital" facts. They are either moved to the notes or completely ignored/lost during the GEDCOM import process.
I am curious as to what the other programs are that allow sourcing of the individual components of an "event'. I have, at the very least, experimented with several different programs (FTM, Ancestral Quest, Legacy, MyHeritage FTB, Gramps, etc) and don't remember this option in any of them.
I have an enhancement request for the People view: to remember the adjusted widths of columns. I assume because the user has the option of selecting several fact fields in the People view, making the columns auto-adjust probably would not work very well. I do wish, however, the program could at least remember the widths after they are manually adjusted by the user to fit the data. Reducing the font size on the display helped, but I wouldn't be able to read it if I went any smaller.
Sorry about the 'Family List' tag. My mind was wondering.
TomH: As I said, I've never had a problem keeping the data file for RM (or FTM, for that matter) on Onedrive, but I will certainly heed your advice. I'm not sure why this would cause any corruption of a database, but I do know that when I tried doing the same thing with the Gramps genealogy program it did corrupt the files. Wonder if that was why.
I've been using OneDrive for a couple of years with my two computers and have never had any problem. I always make sure I've closed out of the RM data file on one computer before opening it on the other. And, of course I always backup my file just to be safe. (Don't know about running them simultaneously. Never tried it.)
I personally am not a fan of having a lot of AKAs in my tree. I usually use the most common name (the one they were most referred to throughout their lives), but for some of immigrant ancestors whose names were Americanized, my 2nd Great Grandfather, for example, who added the Lynnes farm name (from Norway) because there were so many Olsen's in the US when he came over, I will put the birth name in the description field in such a way that it prints out "Andrew Olsen Lynnes, born Andres Olsen, was born March 11, 1890...." (A practice I started in FTM.) I do, however, make certain that the way the name is in each source (including spelling differences) is notated in the citation and may include a note as to why I'm so certain that they are one-and-the-same person if I feel it is warranted.
I'm having a problem with the "Source List" report. While the sources are being formatted properly (i.e., italicized), the citation Research Notes and Detail Comments are not. Instead of actually formatting the text, it shows the formatting codes. Following is an example of how it appears on the report:
In regards to the difference in the number of people between your Ancestry file and RM, some programs will only export individuals linked, one way or another, to the "home" person. I don't know if this is the case in your situation, but that would be my guess.
I find this rather interesting. I had the same situation a few years back when I was still using Family Tree Maker, except more often than not it was only the wife/mother that duplicated, but the duplicate family never included the second spouse. However, all the children I had in the original family appeared in the second family, as did any shared facts (along with any citations) from the original family. I had no idea at the time how or when it happened and could get any answer from either Ancestry or FTM support. My only thought was perhaps it occurred when I ran the compression tool on FTM and never considered it to have happened when I synced my FTM file to Ancestry. Sadly, I still come across these every so often in my file.
I would think this would be a personal preference, however, keep in mind that if you move this information to an alternate name fact the only reports it will show up on is those reports where all facts are listed out (at least to the best of my knowledge). The "Descendant List" would not print Alt Name fact.
I know this isn't exactly the same issue you are having, but I came across an issue with how to record a person's name, and personally, I struggled with how to handle it for a couple weeks. Throughout the years my grandmother flipped her first and middle name, then added a second middle name. I chose to enter it the way she had entered it in the Family Bible, be it mixed up and added to. Even though her birth certificate says one thing, she put it in the Bible this way and this is how (I believe) she wanted to be remembered by future generations. I would think your ancestor would also want to be remembered that way, especially when dealing with nobility titles.
The option is to upload all your media or not upload all your media. It's all or nothing. RM does not have any privacy options for media.
That is what I was afraid of. I'm going to have to think this one over. I have so much media I do want to share, but a lot I simply cannot.
Thanks for your help, again, Jerry.
I have not yet linked my RM family tree to Ancestry.com. One of the reasons I hesitate is that, while most of the media I have in my file can be shared (and in fact, much of it came from Ancestry.com), I have many media items that needs to remain private. From past experience I know that any media put on Ancestry.com is automatically shared unless otherwise marked as private. I also understand, if a media item inadvertently gets uploaded to Ancestry.com and it isn't marked as private at the time, it can take a couple of days for the privacy settings to kick in after the setting is changed and, given the number of users they have, it may be too late... others may have it and be sharing it.
My question is, when I share my file on Ancestry.com, will the media automatically be uploaded as well? If so, is there any way to mark individual media files on the RM side as private? (I could not find it if there is.)
The source reference number and detail reference number are not a part of the Source Template Language. At the present time, your only option is redundant fields.
The fields are searchable from the Find dialog. You can't find them directly in a source list, but you can find people who have sources or citations which include them.
(RM won't let me like your comments. Says I've met my quota even though this is the only post I've been on all day. LOL)
I may be in the wrong topic, but I am curious if there are field names for the Source Reference Number found on the (Master Text tab) and the Detail Reference Number (found on the Detail Text tab) that can be used in customizing sentences? I would like to include these at the end of each of my footnotes (in brackets or parentheses) so that I have this information printed out on reports without having to go into each source/citation to look it up. If there are already ways to bring this information into the footnotes, that would be the better option rather than adding these additional (and redundant) fields to the source templates.