|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
Wendy McGuire
Mike,
Sorry for the confusion. I used the recommended import as you outlined. Thanks for the explanations about the email list and the FHUG website. |
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
Wendy, Why are you using GEDCOM import? Use the direct import as recommended in the advice. Use FH File > Project Window > New Project… Import from other family tree file, and Browse… to the TMG Project .PJC file.
The plugin options you chose are correct.
This Email list is run by Calico Pie and adding screenshots is delayed because they are manually reviewed.
The FHUG website Forum is run by FH users and adding screenshots and cross-refs to the Knowledge Base are easier. I would like to see a screenshot of the Main tab and Facts tab after converting the Birth-Cust fact. It might also be necessary to check the FH GEDCOM file. All that is much easier in the FHUG Forums.
Mike Tate
|
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
colevalleygirl@colevalleygirl.co.uk
“What's the difference between this list and the forum?
The list is run by Calico Pie; the forum (FHUG) is an independent user group (with an associated Knowledge Base written by users). The same ‘experts’ tend to hang out on both to offer help, but there are more people registered on the forum who may also join in a discussion with examples of what they do in a particular circumstance.
You can post attachments (images) both here and at FHUG. Here, they’re reviewed before they’re posted, but that tends to be quite quick during the UK day/evening – say 0600 to 2000. On FHUG, they’ll appear immediately.
So use whichever suits you best – or use both. You can browse/search FHUG without registering for an account, so can benefit from the discussion there anyway if it’s relevant to you, and it’s always worth searching to see if your ‘issue’ has come up before.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Wendy McGuire
Sent: 01 August 2022 19:41 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Transferring custom birth tag
Thanks, Paul, but doing that did not have the birth date appear after Born: on the Main tab.
|
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
Wendy McGuire
Thanks, Paul, but doing that did not have the birth date appear after Born: on the Main tab.
|
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
Janis Rodriguez
First message from another new TMG user exploring Family Historian 7:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I agree that having multiple, custom birth tags is not all that unusual, especially during time frames when there are no, or few, birth records and the researcher is relying on censuses and other secondary records. I have several people whose ages vary (sometimes widely) from census to census and whose children record their parents birth places on their death certificates as the location where their parents were “from” but do not appear to know the exact location of their birth! When your ancestors are migrating across a continent, record keeping can be scattered and sometimes lax. Many TMG users have taken advantage of the flexibility of that program to add custom tags of all types to distinguish between all types of circumstances. Of course I used these custom tags the most on my direct ancestors whose information is the most precious to me. Our custom tag usage appears to be coming back to bite us a bit in the migration process but hopefully we’ll be able to work through it. Thanks, all, for your help on this journey of discovery! Jan Rodriguez
|
|
|
|
Re: Note for Addresses
I can only repeat that FH does not support this at present, several other packages do and I understand the desirability. However each bespoke workaround will require a bespoke correction to unearth the possible advantages if/when CP provide support for such desired embellishments to sites/addresses.
|
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
colevalleygirl@colevalleygirl.co.uk
Yes, deleted the wrong half of your post in my original quote, for which I apologise.
“I would think that is not the case.”
Exactly. It’s your opinion, not a fact, and you should state it as such. There are perfectly good reasons to do it; perhaps somebody wants to use the separate facts when constructing a proof argument, or even just use the new features in FH to record their thinking when discounting a possible birth. Neither you nor I know how many people do or don’t record multiple birth facts, so we can only have opinions (aka guesses).
I want to repeat the point that there is nothing unusual or wrong about it at all. By not clarifying that it’s your opinion about how things are/should be done, you may be deterring people from adopting that way of working when it could best suit what they want to achieve.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 01 August 2022 12:49 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Transferring custom birth tag
But you didn’t quote that half of my message and only quoted the other half. So you seem to be claiming that multiple Birth events are usual, i.e. habitually or typically occurring or done; customary. I would think that is not the case.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of colevalleygirl@...
I was reacting to:
“Paul, that should only be necessary if there is more than one Birth event, which would be unusual.” |
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
But you didn’t quote that half of my message and only quoted the other half. So you seem to be claiming that multiple Birth events are usual, i.e. habitually or typically occurring or done; customary. I would think that is not the case.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of colevalleygirl@...
Sent: 01 August 2022 10:48 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Transferring custom birth tag
I was reacting to:
“Paul, that should only be necessary if there is more than one Birth event, which would be unusual.”
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Helen, I think you have misread my message. I did mention the possibility of multi-instance Birth events and only said the Preferred flag was pointless on single instance facts. What is dogmatic about that? That seems perfectly reasonable in the context of this thread regarding the import of custom Birth facts from TMG.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of colevalleygirl@...
“Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts.”
That sounds a bit dogmatic, Mike, when it’s an opinion not a golden rule.
It may not be your method of working, but some (unknown number) of people recording multiple (e.g.) birth facts and use the preferred and rejected flags to indicate what they’ve concluded about which is/are most likely.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Paul, that should only be necessary if there is more than one Birth event, which would be unusual.
Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts. |
|
|
|
Re: Note for Addresses
Victor,
You can link an image (e.g. of a certificate) to a source record, and you can link an image (e.g. a map) to a Place record. But you cannot add an image directly to an address, because addresses are not records. That is the point.
Similarly, as the original questioner pointed out, you can add a note to a Place record but not to an address. He did consider adding a note to every fact where the address is used but that would be time consuming and involve unnecessary duplication. The same would be true of adding an image to every fact where the address is used.
One workaround which was suggested is to move address details into the place record and not use the address field at all. That results in a huge number of place records but some people do it that way. However the original question is specifically about address fields, not Place records.
From: Victor Markham via groups.io
I was thinking logically Put it this way If one has a certificate one puts details of the certificate with the addition of an image For an address put details of the address with an image of a street map of the area. I much prefer this to using latitude and longitude figures. Victor On 30 Jul 2022, at 10:42, Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:
_._,_._,_
|
|
|
|
Re: Note for Addresses
Victor Markham
I was thinking logically
Put it this way
If one has a certificate one puts details of the certificate with the addition of an image
For an address put details of the address with an image of a street map of the area.
I much prefer this to using latitude and longitude figures.
Victor
On 30 Jul 2022, at 10:42, Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
colevalleygirl@colevalleygirl.co.uk
I was reacting to:
“Paul, that should only be necessary if there is more than one Birth event, which would be unusual.”
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 01 August 2022 10:43 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Transferring custom birth tag
Helen, I think you have misread my message. I did mention the possibility of multi-instance Birth events and only said the Preferred flag was pointless on single instance facts. What is dogmatic about that? That seems perfectly reasonable in the context of this thread regarding the import of custom Birth facts from TMG.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of colevalleygirl@...
“Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts.”
That sounds a bit dogmatic, Mike, when it’s an opinion not a golden rule.
It may not be your method of working, but some (unknown number) of people recording multiple (e.g.) birth facts and use the preferred and rejected flags to indicate what they’ve concluded about which is/are most likely.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Paul, that should only be necessary if there is more than one Birth event, which would be unusual.
Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts. |
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
Helen, I think you have misread my message. I did mention the possibility of multi-instance Birth events and only said the Preferred flag was pointless on single instance facts. What is dogmatic about that? That seems perfectly reasonable in the context of this thread regarding the import of custom Birth facts from TMG.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of colevalleygirl@...
Sent: 01 August 2022 10:30 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Transferring custom birth tag
“Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts.”
That sounds a bit dogmatic, Mike, when it’s an opinion not a golden rule.
It may not be your method of working, but some (unknown number) of people recording multiple (e.g.) birth facts and use the preferred and rejected flags to indicate what they’ve concluded about which is/are most likely.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Paul, that should only be necessary if there is more than one Birth event, which would be unusual.
Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts. |
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
colevalleygirl@colevalleygirl.co.uk
“Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts.”
That sounds a bit dogmatic, Mike, when it’s an opinion not a golden rule.
It may not be your method of working, but some (unknown number) of people recording multiple (e.g.) birth facts and use the preferred and rejected flags to indicate what they’ve concluded about which is/are most likely.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 01 August 2022 10:24 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Transferring custom birth tag
Paul, that should only be necessary if there is more than one Birth event, which would be unusual.
Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts. |
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
Paul, that should only be necessary if there is more than one Birth event, which would be unusual.
Yes, it is useful for multiple facts such as Occupation or Census or Residence but pointless for single instance facts.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Paul Tanner-Tremaine
Sent: 01 August 2022 09:28 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Transferring custom birth tag
On the facts tab, highlight the one that needs to show the date, right click, then Fact Flags, and select Preferred. I do this with occupations to show the latest or last Occupation fact. |
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
Paul Tanner-Tremaine
On the facts tab, highlight the one that needs o show the date, right click, then Fact Flags, and select Preferred. I do this with occupations to show the latest or last Occupation fact.
|
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
If they really are standard Birth (BIRT) events then the Main tab should show the Born date. So may be the conversion is not what you thought. Exactly what options did you choose? A screenshot of the Plugin would help but that becomes slow on this Email forum. The FHUG Forum is easier for these discussions at https://www.fhug.org.uk/forum/
Mike Tate
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Wendy McGuire
Sent: 31 July 2022 17:54 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Transferring custom birth tag
Thanks for sticking with me. I downloaded the Plugin, ran it and changed the custom birth tag to Birth, and saw 156 changes as expected. The changes appear in the Facts tab. I'm missing something obvious. What do I do next to have the 156 changed birth tags appear in the Main tab window so each individual shows their birth date after Born:? |
|
|
|
Re: Recording a family member linked by IVF
Adrian Bruce
On Sun, 31 Jul 2022 at 19:11, uhkh3tsccmz9@... <uhkh3tsccmz9@...> wrote: ... If you make enough of those pieces public others will be able to identify the father by jig-saw identification ... We're missing an important bit of information. If James was talking about his tree in Family Historian, then that bit of info is - does he ever publish it, or any part of it, in any fashion? Whether through reports, extracts, charts or whatever? If the answer to that is "No" then it doesn't matter how the information is recorded within FH. All the tactics in the world are pointless if no-one ever sees your data. Conversely, if someone has access to your PC and so to your tree, then they see what you see - everything. If, on the other hand, there is a possibility that James will run off some reports (or charts or...) then he needs to be a lot more careful. If people appear for - apparently - no good reason, then, as argued above, any genealogist worth their salt can ask the question "Why are they there?" and then often work things out from the hints. I would be tempted to record the potential father and their own relatives just as plain text enclosed in privacy brackets attached to a note against the child - no other individual records or anything. Certainly, it's tempting to leave them out altogether and just write them up as notes in a document held elsewhere, but then unless you're really organised, you're liable to lose the stuff or accidentally put it into a shared area of your Dropbox or whatever... So that's not always the answer. Adrian |
|
|
|
Re: Query not bringing back expected results
Steve Miller
Thank you all for your advice. It is interesting to see different approaches. I changed my Expression to:
=SourceLinks(["Source"],%INDI%) Which I took from the Query Bev mentioned. It does ask me to select a Source from a drop down list, instead of referencing a single source, but I can live with that! Thank you all for your timely responses. Steve |
|
|
|
Re: Recording a family member linked by IVF
uhkh3tsccmz9@beconfidential.com
It sounds as if you have identified the father by "jig-saw" identification (putting together the pieces). If you make enough of those pieces public others will be able to identify the father by jig-saw identification.
If you want to "protect the anonymity of the father", I would keep all the pieces outside your tree, the conceived child, the circumstances of their conception, the two brothers and possibly the two siblings (because if you record them it opens the question as to why their (IVF conceived) sibling is not showing). It will just be an undocumented and hence invisible branch of your tree. In genealogy there is no obligation to record all information! My late mother (who was adopted) has her genetic lines documented outside the family tree, because her paternal family I think have no knowledge of her existence (or of course the circumstances by which she was conceived). I have made the decision to effectively leave two of my six grand-parents out of my family tree. It's not worth the risk of causing very grave offence. |
|
|
|
Re: Transferring custom birth tag
Wendy McGuire
Thanks for sticking with me. I downloaded the Plugin, ran it and changed the custom birth tag to Birth, and saw 156 changes as expected. The changes appear in the Facts tab. I'm missing something obvious. What do I do next to have the 156 changed birth tags appear in the Main tab window so each individual shows their birth date after Born:?
|
|
|
