Family Historian User Group

You and Mike have both arrived at the same conclusion i did. A source is often not specific to an individual/fact so a single Custom ID cant be added automatically.

I'm curious -- which Individual's record ID would you include for e.g. a Marriage? Both of them I guess.

What about a census?

Other than the extensions you mentioned in your earlier post from 2021, are you using any others? Thanks, Shoshanna Full list I've currently got installed (with author for disambiguation): Lua (sumneko) - Lua language support StyLua (JohnnyMorganz) - Formatting Todo Tree (GruntFuggly) - Show TODO, ...

redx593, please update your profile to show that you're using V7, to help people better answer your queries in future. Click on your username (top right), the Profile, then Edit Profile.

You're probably well aware of that constraint and have factored it into your intended use, but I didn't want a new user to find this thread in the future, spend a lot of time setting up the transfer, and then finding it doesn't work for them. Plus of course, links are subject to change as providers...

tatewise wrote: ↑

11 Aug 2023 20:51

However, here is the plugin script that will delete them all.

Worth adding to the KB as a code snippet, Mike?

Version 1.8 in the plugin store fixes this problem.

As I said, I agree it ought to go on the Wish List. But I'm not hopeful... Also, I wouldn't call a fully functional IDE with GitHub integration a 'workaround'. It's not something an infrequent plugin developer would want, It's a solution for plugin authors who already use it for other purposes/langu...

Colin, the issue with IDEs is hooking into the FH runtime environment. Using Visual Studio Code (free) I have to copy the code file into the FH plugins directory to debug it... not something everyone would be willing to do.

It's on my to-do list, Mike, but not high up as it's a niche interest.

I agree with it going on the wish list but wouldn't use it as I am very happy with Visual Studio Code including integration with Github. I must update the FH function definition file I use for V7 though...

Sorry, Mike, I meant to respond to this bit, and explain why I add Notes via the Re3cords window rather than as you suggest: You don't have to create Note Records via the Records Window Notes tab any more than you have to create Research Notes via the Records Window. Every type of Property Box (for ...

No, you cannot change the order of the Records Window tabs. Why would you want to? When I intend to create a Shared Note that links to several Individuals etc. I create the Note in the Record Window Notes tab (or the Research Notes tab, as appropriate) and then add the links. It's quicker and easie...

I write my proof arguments in Word, convert them to PDF and attach them as a media item to the Individual (for questions of identity) or a specific assertion (Fact). I ought to say that I only share my tree including proof statements on my own website, with a custom method of providing a link to the...

We’ll agree to politely disagree on that final assertion. One thing that’s becoming increasingly apparent to me as I get involved in other FH groups outside FHUG is that we are not representative of FH users in general, and most folk seem to use the product at a far more basic level than the relati...

Thanks -- will take a look but can't until tomorrow.

It's nothing to do with you using the free version. Can you post a screenshot of where you're not seeing what you expect (instructions at Forum Usage Tips -- scroll down to the section on attachments. And have you found the Knowledge Base info on Sources and Citations? Sources and Citations in Versi...

as they are by implication facts where date is not relevant. Not sure that's always the case, Mark -- it could be for things like an SSN or DNA data, but there may be other facts that a user has a date for that they want to sort 'out of the way' for reasons we can't predict. You could pursue the 'l...

Proposal: Two new values for Normal Time Frame, "First" for items that should sort to the top of the Facts tab and elsewhere, and "Last" for items that should sort to the end. (It could be argued there's some overlap between "First" and "Pre-birth"). Benefits: This would allow users to position ite...

While I think about it, how does the sorting option play with dated facts.... My memory might be failing me, but I can't recall if a fact with a date post birth can be created in the e.g. Pre-birth timeframe?

rcpettit has not responded to your question: "Does sorting to the top (or bottom) meet your need?" Until we know the answer to that any detailed discussion is somewhat pointless. I'm not wanting the developers to add a attributes tab, we can do that on our own. I' was wondering if there was a way t...

The problem with using Custom tabs (with which I am familiar, Mike but thanks for the lecture) for data entry is the complexity of creating them, and the fact that they could multiply alarmingly with this approach. If you have several Attribute types you want to exclude from the Facts tab (which I g...

Presumably, once a custom tab has been created to display the 'hidden' facts, then that has the mechanism for adding those facts in much the same way the Main tab has for adding Birth, Death, Marriage facts, etc. A few 'hidden' facts could even be added to the Main tab without needing a custom tab....

Does sorting to the top (or bottom) meet your need? If not, I'll move this back to the New Wish List Request forum for you to work up into a proposal (simply: what you want to see, what the benefits are, possibly an example from elsewhere.) I advise not using the word attribute but stick to fact to ...

Where did the reference come from? Posted at same time as Adrian. Edited to add: There are chunks of missing birth registrations in the GRO indices -- they either got missed in the original copying between the local Registrar and the GRO, or got missed or corrupted in the digitisation. I know of a n...