Family Historian User Group

Hi Peter You've posted this in the AS forum which suggests you think this is more likely to be an AS issue. I'm not aware of any problem with AS that would create these additional facts. However, depending on the options you've set in AS, it will automatically fill in certain fields for you: e.g. fo...

Agree forum should cover all aspects, but we should note the strap-line at the top of every page - “Helping Family Historian users since 2002”. IMO, that is the core purpose of what we do. I think if one of our users has something they want to discuss then we are helping them, even if it doesn't in...

I think there needs to be a decision as to whether this forum is just for asking questions and getting responses or whether people are allowed to have discussions about things which are perhaps more technical in nature and perhaps do ramble on and will only be of interest to a minority of the users....

It is very interesting and mysterious! I wonder if any of the other marriage records in the register have similar coded messages?

As Lorna mentioned, I did note that when you requested it earlier. Like Lorna I wasn't sure what you meant by your other suggestion, but I guess you mean "Can the place text box be a drop-down list instead?". I've seen some user's files with 20,000+ places recorded and so it wouldn't be practical fo...

I asked about an objective definition of splitting . As always, it seems, the thread has devolved into something that is far from what I originally asked or intended. This is not the fault of any one person, but rather that there is an inclination to dissect each post and comment on something that ...

I am absolutely saying this: Are you saying that you have absolutely no "information specific to the fact being cited"? No names, dates, pages etc. It would seem rather useless to have that situation The source information is recorded in the source itself, the citation doesn't need any data. The sou...

Nick; I disagree with your interpretation of the standard and am not misunderstanding what I read. The phrase "generally best" has a very important meaning when used in a standard and would not have otherwise been included. Such a phrase is sometimes used when an explicit "should" or "shall" clause...

Nick; From the same GEDCOM standard as previously quoted: Added a <<SOURCE_CITATION>> structure subordinate to the fact being cited. It is generally best if the source citation contains only information specific to the fact being cited and then points to the more general description of the source, ...

Based upon what I've seen so far, the GEDCOM standard expects to have at least some content in the citation portion. So; even the most extreme splitter ought to have something in the citation-portion. That is the aspect that was bothering me the most, since I'd been told that the most extreme split...

Ancestral Sources is used to enter data, it is not designed to edit existing data. Family Historian has perfectly good facilities for editing data. In addition it would be an almost impossible task for AS to pull existing data back in for editing, except in a limited way. When AS records a census en...

I may get tagged as an 'advanced user' but in actual fact I am a very basic user. I never answer questions here on most topics because I don't use them very much. I have never dabled with plugins, I've rarely written queries, I rarely use trees and certainly haven't ever customised them. So I'd argu...

Thanks for the replies. I understand that lump is more complicated, but that is what I want to use and hope that AS can make it quick and easy for me. Also, I do understand that this is not an issue with AS and do not believe I indicated it was. You will notice that the last part of my post was "or...

I've been thinking about this and I'd be interested in seeing some of these threads where people ask a basic beginners question and then someone answers it in an unnecessarily 'techie' way. Have a look down the 'General Usage' forum and find the conversations where that happens. I've looked through ...

I would like to work on genealogy, instead I find myself working on Family Historian. I can't find answers to questions in the knowledge base because, as another mentioned, I can't figure out the key words. I end up here and exactly as you say it is mostly techie. It seems I start with 3rd level su...

cwhermann wrote: ↑

04 May 2023 02:56

I have not found any issues in using method 2 once you get the templates set up. I understand there may be some issues if I want to use AS at some point.

The version of AS that is currently being tested now supports using Source Templates with Method 2 (lumper) sources.

Helen covered that in her initial proposals. Things like data references are ubiquitous throughout FH, so shouldn’t be split off. IMO, there’s no harm at all in occasionally having to give a complex answer, but it may not be appropriate to get into a deep discussion in a general forum. If there is ...

The thread seems to have wandered quite far from my original question "Is someone aware of an article or video that discusses the pros and cons of using a particular combination of the three?" I really thought it was a fairly direct question and hadn't expected a lengthy discussion. I agree that wa...

The term “fact” (as used in a lot of software) is really a misunderstanding of the process. We are not recording ‘facts’ we are recording ‘events’. We are not ‘concluding’, we are providing ‘evidence’. Based on a the evidence we assert a hypothesis that may become a fact when other collaborative ev...

Could you clarify why you create a census record? I don't understand the value of being able to run queries on census entries, if the content can't be trusted. For the majority of individuals in my tree (and this will be the case for all researchers I think), there is very little documentary eviden...

tatewise wrote: ↑

28 Apr 2023 10:36

... except that Nick said 'given name' when he meant 'surname'.

Yes quite right I did - that's what happens when I answer questions before I have my first coffee of the day

Just to expand on this... In the new version that you're testing, I've built in support for using Source Templates with Method 2 (lumper) sources. This adds all sorts of complications because in most cases when selecting an existing source the user will only be entering source template fields which ...

Just to add to Mike's answer... I suspect you've entered the name in AS as Abbott, Mary Ann whereas it should have been entered as Mary Ann Abbott. AS would then put the // around Abbott on the assumption that Abbott is the given name surname (which would be correct in this case).

Click the little button to the right of the repository field. Does that work? That's how it is meant to work.

I pretty much only use the shorter list of Active Topics on the FHUG home page, as I check the page generally at least daily and it is rare that there are more than 10 topics with new posts - they are highlighted if I've not read them. If all 10 are highlighted as having new posts, I click the 'View...