Family Historian User Group

I was trying to add an entry for the 1911 census for a family but whilst the address was in the Family Historian database did not appear when I start to enter it in AS

I have checked the address in FH and it appears to one of a small number that has a 0 in the use count. Obviously one that I had used before and deleted the event but FH has retained the address.

Which means I assume that FH is not including it in a Gedcom despite the fact that it has retained it in the database.

Adding the address (copy and pasted from FH) it all worked and now the entry in FH shows a count to match the initial one with 0 - So I assume that it amalgamated them when re-opening the file

I suspect that when you say address you are actually talking about Place fields & records.

Just like any other type of record that is not used, FH retains unused (0 Used count) in the Project and therefore by definition in the GEDCOM file.

However, perhaps AS does not take any notice of unused Place records.

Any multiple uses of the same Place name must use the same Place record because they are linked by name and not Record Id. So it is impossible for two Place records to have the same Place name.

Mike
Yes I meant Place - having ported the database from TMG address and place are all in the same field and I don't intend to split them

As you say would make sense for FH to merge the two when the revised file was re-opened

So still the question as the why AS is not recognising the address in the file but not used

Regards
John Hanson

Hi John

When you enter a place into Ancestral Sources, it then lists addresses that are associated with the place in Family Historian. So if, for example, I type in Grappenhall, Cheshire as the place, the address list will be populated with all the addresses that appear in facts where the place is Grappenhall, Cheshire. So if you're not using the place field and just the address then really AS won't handle that.

Cheers

Nick

So if you're not using the place field and just the address then really AS won't handle that.

Nick, I think it's the other way round. John said he meant 'place', so he is not using the address field but just the place. This is confirmed by the fact that he said the 'address' (i.e. the place) was showing in FH but with 0 uses. FH retains unused Place records but it doesn't retain unused addresses.

His question is why AS didn't recognise the Place when he started to type it.

Ah OK thanks for clarifying Lorna. AS will only recognise a place that has been used in a fact. AS predates the use of Place records which first appeared in a later version of Family Historian. I don't think I'd ever really imagined that there would be place records that are not involved in any facts so I've never bothered to have AS also process the place records as it would just slow the load time.