Import from TMG
|
Bob, I am also pleased and anyone who has been doing this for a while can identify from schoolboy errors. I had a similar experience migrating from Rootsmagic where I had a lot of superfluous data entry intended to overcome shortcomings, they also jumped out in FH. With each direct import I reported any observations to CP and found them responsive, for me it was quirky little used issues which may have been missed by many. You are doing future TMG migrants a great service. Jackson On Sat, 26 Nov 2022, 12:08 Bob Hunter, <rmwhunter@...> wrote: I have to report that my latest trial import went very smoothly, and it seems that all my issues have been resolved. |
|
|
|
I am pleased that the issues have been resolved to your satisfaction and impressed that CP responded so quickly and positively.
Enjoy your journey with FH.
|
|
|
|
I have to report that my latest trial import went very smoothly, and it seems that all my issues have been resolved.
There are, of course, other issues to tidy up, but to be honest they were issues in TMG as well. They are to do with my clumsy and untidy use of that program, it is only in this new environment that they jump out at me. There's a lot to be said for changing your program, it improves your organisation no-end! I am very pleased! BobH |
|
|
|
Thanks, Mike. CP did promise me changes in their next update to address my problems and looking at the update notes they appear to have done so. I have spent the last day or so reviewing my English (US) tag names and double checked their assigned GEDCOM, and I've also back-pedalled on some of my personalisation's in TMG. I'll run another trial import in the next 24 hours and see how it goes.
BobH |
|
|
|
Bob, Not sure if as a result of you reporting this to CP but FH V7.0.18 is available with fixes for many of the TMG import issues discussed here. Mike
|
|
|
|
Bob, Can you raise a support ticket with CP via http://www.calico-pie.com/osticket/open.php Refer to this thread and make the point it refers to many other threads. Say that the last few postings here identify the fundamental problems (again)! Your knowledge of TMG and its inter-dependencies is far greater than mine. CP may ask for small sample TMG projects that demonstrate the problems.
|
|
|
|
Mike
I think you have Identified the problems better than I could! I'll look at those FHUG topics to see what workarounds people have suggested. I have my own ideas, but they all involve a lot of work and I'd like to think that there might be better ideas out there! I think that your points (1) and (4?) are linked. TMG requires there to be a marriage group tag for them to be recognised by the program to be in a spousal relationship, if you remove all marriage tags then their relationship also ceases. If Family Historian is not recognising a custom marriage tag as a marriage/shared tag then FH has no evidence of a spousal relationship and (correctly) does not create one. Solve the Tag recognition and you solve the spousal recognition. Thank you for your help over the last few days. As I said earlier a failed test import is not all bad, it has hugely improved my understanding of Family Historian and your help has contributed extensively to that understanding Bob |
|
|
|
Bob, I was heading in the same direction as you and suggesting that CP are involved (again). You are correct that the Help for importing TMG Tag Types is not detailed enough. In summary, your main problems are: 1) Some standard GEDCOM Tag Types do not import to FH as Standard GEDCOM Facts. 2) Custom Tag Types shared by a family couple do not import to FH as Family (red bullet) Facts. 3) The Language setting chosen in TMG is not honoured for Fact Names imported to FH. 3) Some TMG Spouse couples do not import to FH as Family couples. It seems that your problems have arisen and been discussed before in the FHUG Forums: Import of custom TMG Marriage Tags not becoming Family facts in May 2021: https://www.fhug.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=19441 TMG Fact Type import issues in Aug 2021: https://www.fhug.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=19677 Direct Import from TMG with FH v7.0.8 in Sep 2021: https://www.fhug.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=19809 There were changes in FH V7.0.9 following my dialogue with CP but some issues may not be fixed. Did you see the article Importing from The Master Genealogist on the Family Historian website? However, it does not answer the points raised above and point 1) seems contrary to the stated rules. FH seems to have reverted to an earlier strategy of using the TMG Label rather than the GEDCOM Tag.
|
|
|
|
John
The language setting in TMG that I use is "English (UK)", it always has been (in fact I had to explore "Help" to find out how to change it for this exercise). This is one of the reasons why the "English (US)" Tag names are so much garbage, they've never been checked or edited. My "1939 Register" tag is imported into Family Historian as "Census 18911" and so on. It doesn't appear to matter what language is used/selected in TMG or what language is chosen during the import process in FH, Family Historian always uses the English (US) tag names for its fact names. I believe this is a fault in the import process that could be addressed by Calico Pie. However, it's not insurmountable, it's just another job on the "Tidy Up" list for Tags in TMG. Along with "edit assigned GEDCOM", there is now "edit (US) names" BobH |
|
|
|
John Hanson
Bob I have vague memories of language issues with something in TMG a long while ago and somehow the language is TMG had got changed from “English (UK)” to “English (US)”
So, it might be worth checking the language setting in TMG Regards John Hanson FSG
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Bob Hunter
Sent: 14 November 2022 20:09 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Import from TMG
By the way I have been importing using the Language "All English (U,K. preferred)" I'll have a go tomorrow after selecting "English (U.K.)" Although according to Help this only affects the sentences (no reference is made to Tag names) |
|
|
|
By the way I have been importing using the Language "All English (U,K. preferred)" I'll have a go tomorrow after selecting "English (U.K.)" Although according to Help this only affects the sentences (no reference is made to Tag names)
Bob |
|
|
|
Have you seen and digested the FH Help for the New Project Wizard for TMG? New Project Wizard - TMG Import Options https://www.family-historian.co.uk/help/fh7/hh_start.htm#newprojectwizardstep2-tmg.html |
|
|
|
Thank you. I’ve just spotted that the TMG Language is English (UK) whereas I thought it had dots like English (U.K.) Also, English (U.S.) is often better I find. Does that Language setting list TMG Tags with different Labels?
Have you seen and digested the FH Help for the New Project Wizard for TMG? New Project Wizard - TMG Import Options https://www.family-historian.co.uk/help/fh7/hh_start.htm#newprojectwizardstep2-tmg.html
There may be some clues that explain what we are seeing there.
|
|
|
|
katrina.hodgson@gmail.com
Hi Bob,
I also use TMG 9.05 UK.
Do you have John Cardinal's (free) TMG Utility?
In TMG-U there's an option Events > Change Event Type that MAY help in translating your Marriage Registration tags to Marriage ones.
Consider posting about this possible option to the TMG Forum, as I don't know what implications (if any) there might be for your sentences and place styles.
Good luck! Katrina |
|
|
|
I mean its import into FH
|
|
|
|
Mike
Here are the screen shots from Project Three, my third sample project and its import into TMG. There is absolutely no doubt that these are the same data |
|
|
|
To discover where any facts are used in FH run the Query > Facts and Events > All Facts. Click on the Fact Type column heading to sort alphabetically. See also FHUG KB Download https://fhug.org.uk/kb/download/all-facts-filter-by-label/
I await your screenshots…
|
|
|
|
Mike
OK - I see the <eclipsed> and <disabled> and how the standard facts have been eclipsed by a TMG Import. Which doesn't alter the fact that (for example) there is a Shared Fact "Engagement" from the TMG Import, an eclipsed Shared Fact "Engagement" from the Standard Set and a further Individual Fact "Engagement1" from the TMG Import. Is there any way of discovering where these facts, and other anomalies, have been used? I'm happy to accept that some of the problem is dirty data coming in, but how discover the dirt to clean it up. You ask if I'm sure that the TMG and FH projects are the same data, and I can assure you they are. But to convince you, I will create a new test project in TMG and import that into FH and post screen shots of those Bob |
|
|
|
Bob, The two facts Engagement (ENGA) & Marriage (MARR) are standard GEDCOM Family facts so get imported as such with a red bullet because FH recognises the TMG Label and GEDCOM Tag. The others are custom facts that rely on other factors to import them correctly.
To check whether a fact has imported to FH as a standard GEDCOM fact do this: Open Tools > Fact Types… and tick Show Hidden on the right, then drag the window as wide as possible. Is a TMG Import (project) fact followed by a Standard fact with the same Name but <eclipsed> & <disabled>? If so then that is a Standard GEDCOM fact such as Birth, Marriage, Death, Occupation.
Whenever I import a TMG Project to FH the TMG Import (project) fact set Names are always synonymous with the TMG Report > Master Tag Type List right down to spacing, upper/lower case, misspellings, etc. The FH list may be a subset but it is a matching subset.
I cannot get my head around all your recent screenshots of those two lists show very different fact Names. Are you absolutely sure that the TMG and FH projects are derived from the same .PJC file? I cannot see from your screenshots whether they even have the same Project name.
Mike |
|
|
|
Mike
Looking at the Family Historian "TMG Import" Fact types, is there any easy explanation for why just some of the other facts have been imported as individual events, See "Engagement" and "Engagement1", "Marr Bann" and "Marr Bann1" and even "Marriage" and "Marriage1". Or are they all different facets of the problem I'm having with MarRe-gister? BobH |
|
|
