Family Historian User Group

I'd like to see a few small changes to the Source Template Definitions. Right now the Record Title format and Bibliography format are restricted to fields that are Source only. However, since I design my sources differently, that can leave the Bibliography empty on reports.

My way of defining a source template is unique. I create a template with the goal of having as FEW sources as possible. This means I do not create a source for each collection. Instead, I have ONE source for BMD Vital Records, one source for US Census records, Naturalizations, Immigration, etc, that I use across all services (Ancestry, FamSearch, FMP, MyHeritage, etc). That means most of the fields in my source are citation specific, such as the Collection Name, the website, film numbers, etc. Because almost everything is citation, that leaves nothing available for the Record Title format and Bibliography formats. Defining whether a field is for Source or Citation is important, but restricting their use in things like the Footnotes, Record Title and bibliography isn't.

In my examples, the Universal BMD definition - there's nothing available for Record Title or Bibliography.

The US Federal Mortality Schedule is a little better.
The Census citation shows one of the pitfalls of restricting the field codes. In the Source I have the Series number for the 1850 Census - which is the same for all states. But in the Citation - I have the Roll number, which is unique to each State, city or county. It appears correctly in the Footnote (highlighted), but I only get half the information in the Bibliography - the Series number only. Defining the Series and Roll as a citation field eliminates it from appearing in the bibliography. Defining both as a source field then forces me to create a new source record for EVERY roll number I reference. The 1920 US Census has 2076 rolls. While I'll never need to create sources for every single one, I'd still end up with far more sources than I'd like.

Everyone uses sources differently, some are lumpers some are splitters. Not sure what you'd call my method but it would be nice to have all the field codes available![attachment=0]Census Citation.jpg

Welcome to the FHUG.

If I understand correctly, that 'Universal BMD' template is only applied to one 'lumped' Source record for all BMD citations.
Therefore, the Record Title Format and the Bibliography Format can both be plain text, i.e. Universal BMD
Then at least they won't be blank.

If you have more than one 'lumped' Source record that uses that 'Universal BMD' template then try this.
Instead of using Autogenerate Record Title for the Source records, use Edit in Popup Window...
i.e. In the Source record Property Box, click the cog to the right of the Title box and Edit in Popup Window...
That gives each Source record a suitable Title.
In the Source Template set Bibliography Format to {%SOUR.TITL%} so the Source Title appears in the Bibliography.

I agree that your Census case cannot be solved by the above technique.
Even though the Bibliography Format allows {%CUR~CITN.PAGE%} and {%CUR~CITN.~TX-ROLL%} to be specified, they are ignored, whereas the Footnote Format works fine with them.

Thanks, I wasn't aware that I could use plain text in those areas. I have used the "Edit popup window" method for the source Title with other records, but those are typically books with really long titles.

Migrating over from RM8 where these is no limitation on using the field codes in bibliography, etc, this was a surprise to me. It's been a smooth transition in all other respects. The census is a big issue for me, as you can guess, since the US is so large, and there are thousands of Rolls per census year, it can be quite difficult to manage. There are some other types which may be difficult to manage in a 'lumper' type of source - things that are maintained by an Archive such as NARA or the National Archives of the UK - those all have Roll numbers, manuscript numbers, individual entry numbers which should be documented.

Thanks for the tips on using {%SOUR.TITL%} {%CUR~CITN.PAGE%} and {%CUR~CITN.~TX-ROLL%} I'll give those a try for other situations.

I'm finding myself in the same boat. I'm a lumper keeping my census records by Year. Not being able to use citation fields in bibliography is a real kill joy. I would love to see that restriction removed so we can completely control our sources.

Wish List entry 599 has been raised.