Family Historian User Group

When copying and pasting a source citation I sometimes copy the citation before all the fields have been completed (for example before ‘Where within source’ or ‘date’ have been entered), then complete the data entry for the citation in the current individual’s property box before switching to a second individual.  When the citation is pasted in the second person’s property box the partially completed citation is pasted and the other details, which are different from those for the first person, can be entered.

I would like to be able to do the same when copying facts:  I sometimes want to copy the fact before all the fields have been completed, because for example age, date, address or some combination of theses might be different for the second individual.   However I find that if more fields are filled AFTER  the fact has been copied they are picked up in the copy and are all pasted in the second person’s record.   Obviously the data in the extra fields can be changed easily but it seems odd that fact-copying behaves differently from source-citation-copying.  

I don’t know whether this behaviour is intentional or a bug.  What do others think?  If it’s a bug I will report it to Calico.


ID:6568

I will agree that it is odd behavior, but FH has behaved the same way since at least version 3.0 (earliest version I have used).
I don't notice as much now, as I mainly used that method for entering census info, then I discovered Gedcom census, and now of course use Ancestral sources.

Copy & Paste can be used in many places in the data hierarchy; not just in Individual Records but also Source Records, Repository Records, etc.
To access these often requires the use of the All tab, and the right-click menu, or Ctrl-C & Ctrl-V.

I have experimented with several Copy & Paste scenarios in some of those various records.
The original data structure, as at the time of the Paste is applied, NOT the structure as it was at the time of the Copy.
The only exception I have found is for Citations!

So it would appear to be an inconsistency in the way FH operates, which should be reported to Calico Pie.

The Help for How to Copy and Paste Source Citations and for Property Box: Facts tab does not give any useful explanations.

I agree that intuitively, the Paste should insert the data as it was when it was Copied, not as it is at the time of Pasting; that just feels wrong!
Just like in a word-processor, if a paragraph is Copied (to the clipboard), and the paragraph is edited, when Paste is used the original paragraph is pasted (from the clipboard), NOT the paragraph after the edit.
In other words Copy & Paste of Citations is intuitively correct, and all the others are intuitively wrong.

Thank you both for your comments.  I will ask Calico Pie about this inconsistency.

In the list of changes that appeared for version 3.1.2 of Family Historian was the following:

In the past when you copied a source citation, the copy only happened when you pasted the citation. So if you changed the original citation after 'copying' it, the pasted citation would include the changes. Now when you copy a source citation, a snapshot is taken at that point, and changes to the copied citation will not affect pasting. Please note: this only applies to copied citations. Copying all other fields will continue to work as before.

So it does seem that, for some reason, Calico made an exception for citations. I agree though that I would expect paste to work the same way for everything i.e. a snapshot of the data should be taken at the point that copy is clicked rather than at the point that paste is clicked.

Nick

I have asked Calico Pie about this and they are aware of the inconsistency within FH.  This is their reply:  

There are 2 paradigms in Windows for copy-and-paste: either the copied item can be a copy of the original as it was when the copy occurred, or the copied item can be a copy of the original as it was when the paste occurred.  The former  is more common, but the latter is also used (e.g. all file copying in Windows Explorer, for example, is paste-time copying).  

The reasons we originally used paste-time copying are largely historical.  In part, it was simply that it was quicker and easier for us to implement copying-and-pasting that way.  The reason that it is inconsistent with citation copying is also historical.  But I agree that it would be better if we used a copy-time paradigm.  I have made a note of it.  Thank you for your feedback.