* Marriage Input Screen lacks {DateREGISTERED}

[Gary_G]

In Scottish statutory marriage records, as in Birth and Death records, there is a registration date shown. In AS v7.8.6 there is no place to enter it for marriages. It would help if this could be added, such that {DATEREGISTERED} could be used in creating a citation for the record.

Example:

Baird_(Thomas)_001__1859-09-06_MARR__M1859_476_00_0010Z.jpg (316.74 KiB) Viewed 499 times

[NickWalker]

AS can't possibly have a text box for every single item that might appear on a marriage certificate somewhere in the world. The autotext template for Scottish marriages puts in a year and month, but these are identical to the marriage date, so it is expected that you'll need to edit these before saving. As I've always said, the autotext makes an approximation/guess of what the transcription might be but it's very rare that it doesn't need editing afterwards. Similarly there are always source template fields that will need to be manually entered. A similar example is that there isn't a box to enter whether a parish record is an original or a bishops transcript. I do appreciate though that this is just a suggestion you're making and a perfectly reasonable one.

I haven't mentioned this publicly before but I'm at a bit of a cross-roads with my AS development. About 3 years ago it became necessary for me to purchase a code signing certificate because security software and web browsers were becoming increasingly strict about stopping the download of software without a certificate. I was unhappy about having to spend £100 a year for software that I provide for no payment but I did decide to do this. When I came to renew last month I was horrified to discover that this price has risen considerably, my cheapest option being to spend around £830 for a 3 year certificate. This effectively makes it impossible for a free software model to be viable. Why should I spend hundreds/thousands of hours developing software and giving it away for free if I'm also going to be out of pocket. I do get donations but these are meant to be a thank you to me and not a payment to pass on to companies that sell certificates. I genuinely don't know what I'm going to do going forward but it does mean that for now I'm not going to be releasing any updates. I'd be really sad for this to be where AS ends but I'm just so frustrated about this. An option is to release the software without code signing but then I find it insulting that anyone downloading my software will be warned that it can't be trusted and is likely to be dangerous etc. Sorry to railroad this thread but I thought I should mention it as I expect you'll ask for various developments now you're using AS properly and I'm normally very proactive in adding new features for people.

[tatewise]

Nick, does that certificate issue need to be a separate thread where options can be discussed?

[Gary_G]

Nick;

I really haven't yet made up my mind yet about whether or not to use AS in "Production mode". I've been making templates and trying different citation options on a test set of data. I want to be sure that when I start entering my backlog of data, I don't have to constantly stop and rework templates in order to proceed. What you've seen from my posts are just some of the things I've run into during my evaluation. Your help in resolving the noted issues is very much appreciated. But, yes; what I mentioned was just a suggestion. If I do go ahead with regularly using AS, I'll certainly contribute.

Unfortunately; I've been running into significant issues with trying to meet the requirements of the Evidence explained style. These issues really have nothing to do with AS itself. Evidence Explained is overly prescriptive as to citation content and format/style. Even some of the offshoots of that style would likely present some issues. I am, at the moment, reconsidering whether to use Strathclyde Style. It is far less demanding and might work better for me, both in general and possibly in conjunction with AS. The jury is still out...

[NickWalker]

Nick, does that certificate issue need to be a separate thread where options can be discussed?

if I do go ahead with regularly using AS, I'll certainly contribute.

I don't particularly want a separate discussion about the issue - I've been reluctant to raise it in case it sounds like a ploy to get donations and it definitely isn't that. I'd also like to make that clear to Gary that this wasn't any kind of suggestion that he should be paying me either , I just wanted him to know that I'm not able to make updates to AS to meet requests currently! I have always been clear that AS is free to use and I certainly don't expect donations. I love getting donations and I've used them on occasions to buy myself something indulgent that I wouldn't normally purchase but I don't want to spend that money on a certificate.

[tatewise]

CP feature AS in their website Store as a companion program, so might it be feasible to use the CP certificate?
See Ancestral Sources (free download). Why not ask them? At worst, they can only say no.

[fhtess65]

What awful news... I'll be the first to say, however, that while in general I refuse to pay a yearly subscription for software, in the case of AS, I would be willing to do so if it meant you could keep the software in development. It's such a boon for my workflow. That said, I realize you may not get enough takers, which would be a real shame.

Though I would hate to lose it, I would understand if you just packed it in. Ridiculous that lone software developers providing a free program are being charged the proverbial arm and leg.

<SNIP>
I haven't mentioned this publicly before but I'm at a bit of a cross-roads with my AS development. About 3 years ago it became necessary for me to purchase a code signing certificate because security software and web browsers were becoming increasingly strict about stopping the download of software without a certificate. I was unhappy about having to spend £100 a year for software that I provide for no payment but I did decide to do this. When I came to renew last month I was horrified to discover that this price has risen considerably, my cheapest option being to spend around £830 for a 3 year certificate. This effectively makes it impossible for a free software model to be viable. Why should I spend hundreds/thousands of hours developing software and giving it away for free if I'm also going to be out of pocket. I do get donations but these are meant to be a thank you to me and not a payment to pass on to companies that sell certificates.<SNIP>

[BillH]

What awful news... I'll be the first to say, however, that while in general I refuse to pay a yearly subscription for software, in the case of AS, I would be willing to do so if it meant you could keep the software in development. It's such a boon for my workflow. That said, I realize you may not get enough takers, which would be a real shame.

I second this option. I would be willing to pay a subscription as well. This software is more than worth it.

Bill

[tatewise]

Sorry Nick, but did you really think you would keep a hat on this discussion?
I think it warrants a separate thread.

[ColeValleyGirl]

Nick has said he doesnt want a discussion. I think we should follow his wishes.