Family Historian User Group

It would be convenient and extremely useful if when the record window is sorted on the name that middle names are optionally ignored.

This handles the real life situation where sources sometime list middle names and sometimes don't. As it is, if a dated source lists a middle name you have to check the names with the correct middle name, and then if no match all the names with no middle names. A similar process exists in the reverse situation. When the source has a date, the process can be quite cumbersome as just sorting by the date does not solve the problem as some sources don't have exact dates and then you have all the extraneous other names mixed in as well.

The only workaround that I know of is to select all the individuals with the same first name, move them to a named list (I've set one aside just for this purpose). Then you can sort this smaller list by date order. This process ignores the middle name.

When the database contains a few hundred individuals as in a typical test database the number of duplicate names is minimal and problem not apparent, but some users of FH carry out big projects with thousands of individuals. My own has over 7,000 key individuals and within that I have 300 with the name William.

Item 426

ID:3915

It is possible to sort the records by surname and first name (and date if required) if that would have the desired effect. Or am I missing something?

Are you talking about adding an extra 2 columns to show the forename and surname? Admittedly another workaround to the one I use, but it clutters up the record window with extraneous columns that duplicate information already shown in the 'individual records' column and so wastes up valuable screen space. Also, the information in these extra columns is not needed all the time.

I'll give it 5!

Thought I'd post a bit of my records window to illustrate the point... Very difficult to scan this by eye to see if you already have some particular William Bowyer. An option (I'd leave it permanently on) to ignore middle names in the sort would make all the difference. As you say Jon, I don't want extra columns just for this purpose in normal use, and making a named list and resorting every time you want to do something like this is too much hassle.

You could as I am sure you know do a query for this and use the query as a launch point.

Another option would be to add a single column using something like
=combinetext(%INDI.NAME[1]:SURNAME% ,%INDI.NAME[1]:FIRST%,lifedates2(%INDI%,STD))

It looks a bit un-tidy, but you could build a nested statement to add spaces or commas if you wanted.

Of course as you don't need to see the contents you could make the column very narrow.

Thanks Jane, that works quite nicely though I just use the birth date. Formatting is not necessary as the Individual Record column contains the name already so it's just duplicating data, so shrinking it to just enough to click on to sort works.

However I would still like the option to be placed on the wish list as few will know how to do such a complicated expression (and people are unlikely to find the expression here on the forums that easily).

Jon,
Yes, I was suggesting adding the two necessary extra columns, but their width on screen can be reduced to near zero, so they needn't waste much space and there need be no visible duplication of data. (I see Jane also suggested narrowing the extra column.)

Just a thought before I add the option to the wish list, would it be better to use the given name rather than the first? or give an option to do so as well?

Good point, allow for either with first forename being the default.

As a final note on this issue, the work around I've finally come up with is

=text('/' . %INDI.NAME:SURNAME% . '/' . %INDI.NAME:FIRST% . Year(%INDI.BIRT.DATE%) )

as CombineText is more for prefixes and suffixes and will not output anything if the surname is empty. I also had to insert the '/' to ensure that individuals with no surname were placed together otherwise Alexander // would appear next to John /Alexander/.