Family Historian User Group

Hello,

I find the plugin "To Do List" very useful, but I run a website, and there I also see the "To Do fact" on my website.
Maybe it is written somewhere but I couldn't find it. Can I hide the "To Do fact" from export Gedcom? like I do with the comment [[ ]] ?

greetings

Koenraad

How are you generating your website? By exporting your Gedcom and importing it to another product, from what you ask, I suspect.

If you were generating a report, reports can be configured to exclude specific Facts. However, neither the built in Export Gedcom feature not the Export Gedcom plugin allow the exclusion of specific facts from the export.

It may be the product you use to construct the website has options -- I know for example Gedsite does.

See the how_to:exporting_gedcom_with_multimedia#export_to_website_without_sensitive_data|> Export to Website Without Sensitive Data advice.
The technique involves the File > Import/Export > Export > GEDCOM File command and then the File > Split Tree Helper command to remove To Do facts from the resulting GEDCOM file.

Sledgehammer to crack a nut, Mike? Simpler to check first if the 'receiving end' can do the job, I suggest.

Or make a copy of the project, run a Fact query to find all the To-do Facts, select and delete them IN THE COPY. (The Research Planner provides a suitable Query but I'm not sure my plugin is in use here.) Then do whatever other processing is needed to create the content for your website using the copy project (removing living people etc.) as you already do it.

Alternatively, run the Split Tree Helper on the copy project and configure it to delete the unwanted facts.

It would be even simpler, as Koenraad said, to have the ability to exclude unwanted facts in an Export Gedcom process. Then a copy project wouldn't be needed.

ColeValleyGirl and Tatawise,

Thanks again for the advice !!!

Greetings

Koenraad

You're welcome -- I'm hoping Mike may take a hint about his Export Gedcom plugin.

Hello ColeValleyGirl and Tatawise,

I also hope that it can implemented in the Export Gedcom plugin.
I use this Export Gedcom plug all the time, it's really a great piece of software!!!.
Thanks again for helping me

Greetings

Koenraad

To be honest, I am reluctant to add more features to the Export Gedcom File Plugin, especially where they already exist.
It is exceedingly complex already and maintenance is difficult.

When exporting to a website there is likely to be a great deal of filtering needed, particularly for sensitive data.
That is covered in how_to:exporting_gedcom_with_multimedia#export_to_website_without_sensitive_data|> Export to Website Without Sensitive Data.
It identifies two FH commands and four Plugins that users have identified for various website filtering objectives.
They are all easily applied to the exported GEDCOM file in a few simple steps.
I have no intention to integrate all those features into my Export Gedcom File Plugin.

Hopefully, the features of the File > Split Tree Helper and File > Import/Export > Export > GEDCOM File commands will be rationalised in FH V7:
Split Tree Helper needs delete options for Place records (a significant oversight in FH V6).
Export > GEDCOM File needs delete options for Facts, Notes, Flags & Named Lists just like Split Tree Helper.
With those implemented, I might be able to simplify the Export Gedcom File Plugin.

Users who relish an IT challenge and also find that they need to run the same export repeatedly (say to update an on-line tree somewhere) could always take the plunge and have a go at writing their own dedicated plug-in, tailored to exactly their needs.

I looked at the existing excellent plug-ins for my Ancestry export of just key event data on non-living and non-private individuals and families, and they seemed very much in the "sledgehammer" category - I knew I would never remember to set exactly the same options each time!

I ended up doing it via a completely different route, a Python script of only 150 lines (compared with over 8,000 in the export Gedcom plug-in) that runs just by clicking a shortcut on the desktop, but you could do the same thing with a dedicated FH plug-in.

That is certainly a rational approach but the comparison with 8,000 plugin lines is hardly relevant because that is coping with many more options for many different target products.

Actually, I think it’s very relevant. You said yourself that the general purpose add-in is complex and difficult to maintain, but I’m reassuring the newbie who wants something much more specific for their own use that it can be achieved with something much simpler and easier to maintain.

Both types of project have their place. Proliferation of similar add-ins is clearly not desirable, but we want as many people as possible to have the confidence to have a go themselves.