* Multiple Independent Roots for trees.

[creaghp]

Another one from my strange world.

Presently I am researching a village in Ireland where I feel my true roots are.

As part of this I am tracing the trees, etc.. of all the inhabitants in the village etc.. Some are interlinked but most are not. This is generating many independent trees in my file.

Is there any way that These can be viewed in the main screen as roots with the rest of the tree collapsible underneath them. One answer is that they could be stored as different files but then I find a link and some may join together. Even if this root was predicated on a particular time, it would be OK. (ie 1850 is the base date therefore any links before that time would not affect the view.


ID:449

[GreySquirrel]

I don't know the answer but would be very interested in any responses, as I am doing something reasonably similar, being a one-name study of a local name restricted to my home town and its registration district, and therefore am in a similar quandary.

[Jane]

If you set up a list for the 'roots' and add all the roots to the list you could then add the list to the records window and sort by the list entry. The drill down on the records window or the descendant/hourglass diagrams could be used to open the trees as you want.

Another aid is the Search for Orphans query, which groups people who are related together.

You could use the function =RelationPool
on the records window in a similar way to the List discribed above, but all the people would be grouped by pool rather than just the roots of the tree.

[creaghp]

The lists idea is closest to what I am trying to do. However, while the lists window can be populated with the roots, the full number of people in the database appear in the records window.

What I'm really trying to do is have some sort of segmented view where only the subset of elements in the whole data base appear in the records window of any particular root. The list functionality, (even modified so that it would automatically update would be better) would then manage the roots.

I do feel in this project that the list window will at some time get to big, in which case I will be trying to group people together into villages. In this case, the availability of pointers for a list element would be useful. By this I mean that numbers of records could be associated with a single list entry and that clicking on the list entry would open out the sub-elements below it.

[Jane]

Another posibility is to work from a query result window, as you could select the root person you want and only display their descendants etc.

Don't forget you can also work live on a diagram and this may be a good place to start in some cases.

Also you can set up a list so you can work on the people and thier descendants in the list pane which you can obviously resize to be wider than standard.

What I think you are suggesting is a hide not in list for the record window, is that correct ?

[creaghp]

A 'not in' list for the record window is a good description but with two variations.

1. The 'not in' list should be automatic and dynamic in the contents could be changing all the time.

2. Clicking on a new element in the list window generated a new 'not in' list in the record window, again automatically updating the contents of that specific 'not in' list.

[SimonOrde]

Suppose there were a filter mechanism on the Records Window that allowed records to be filtered (excluded or included) based on a query?  The query could be any kind of query.  It might, for example, be 'all descendants of everyone in Named List 'roots''.  When you executed the filter it would look in the 'roots' named list and filter in all and only those people who were the appropriate descendants.  If you wanted to switch to another 'root' you would move them into the 'roots' NamedList and delete the previous occupant(s).  I know that this isn't exactly what you proposed but it seems pretty close.  I would suggest that the filtering would not be dynamic.  i.e. if you dropped a link from X to Y this would never mean that either X or Y suddenly disappeared from the Record Window.  They would only disappear if you refreshed the filter.

What do you think?  If this appeals, the thing to do would be to add it to the Wish List here on this website (call it 'Record Window filtering' say).