* Is it possible to construct a truly Free-Format template in FH7?

[Gary_G]

I would like to paste my existing citation information for artifact citations directly into FH7. These citations have a non-deterministic format, since they follow Evidence Explained style. That is; there really isn't a way to decompose them into a fixed number of template fields below the level of; Bibliography, Footnote and Short-Footnote. Also; some citations contain one or more sets of italics.

So; I tried to construct a "Free-Form" template based upon using an internally-tagged notes field of a splitter-style record (see template definition below). It almost works, but it appears that FH7 strips all "style" information from the tagged field content in the notes prior to assigning it to the formatting fields of a template. Is there any way around this?

Screenshot 2023-11-07 at 8.26.34 AM.png

[ColeValleyGirl]

Freeform Citation Source Templates may be of interest.

[Gary_G]

Freeform Citation Source Templates may be of interest.

Thanks, ColeValleyGirl. I did find 2-3 articles in the KB on the subject. The one you noted was one of them. Unfortunately; it assumes there is only a single italicized field and in a particular position relative to other fields.

EE-Style citations and free-form citations in general, can have a very non-deterministic structure. So; they could have any number of italicized fields and in various places within the citation text. For that reason, defining specific fields, which FH7 does allow to have styles, works for specific cases, but is not a general solution to the issue.

I did like the suggestion in one of the links from the article. It talked about how to tag various parts of an EE-style citation. Calico Pie might be able to adapt its way of processing a format-field string to allow its own tagging system to be used with non-field elements. That would solve the situation in a very robust way.

[tatewise]

The template provided is just an example of what is possible.
You can have as many plain text and italic text metafields defined as you like.
If any metafield value is left empty then it does not contribute to the formatted text.

So, for example, you could have metafields Plain1, Italic1, Plain2, Italic2, Plain3, Italic3, Plain4.
The template Format would use such as:
<{Plain1} <i>{Italic1}</i> {Plain2} <i>{Italic2}</i> {Plain3} <i>{Italic3}</i> {Plain4}>

So that would allow up to three italic sections of text within plain text but would also work with only one.

That scheme could be extended to allow other styles such as bold or underscore but would be more complex.

[Gary_G]

tatewise;

I understand what you mean. Thank you.

I've inherited a lot of family artifacts that will require this approach. The chop-and-allocate process will be a bit more work than a simple cut and paste of the already formatted citation element, but it seems the only way for now.

As I also have to contend with the mandatory commas and semi-colons of EE-style, I'll have to play with the concept a bit before I charge forward. Sure hope Calico Pie decides to address free-format in a more "elegant" way.

I didn't see a "real" free-format capability on the wish list. I can't believe that there aren't others that would find one helpful. Did I miss it?

[sbell95]

I would absolutely support a wish list item for free-format source templates. However, in the absence of that capability currently in FH, I modified Kai Chandler's templates that Helen mentioned in an earlier post. I now have four types of free-form templates:

• one for plain text;
• one for a single italicised field surrounded by plain text (ie digitised sources);
• one for two italicised fields surrounded by plain text (ie digitised newspapers);
• and a special one that has a single italicised field surrounded by plain text but also includes some additional fields in order to work with the UK Census DEA.

Although now that I see Mike's comment, I suppose it's possible to collapse three of these into a single template!

Gary, I understand that you have a lot of citations outside of FH currently, and adding them into one of these schemas would require a lot of cutting/pasting. But if you are intending to use FH going forward, I think it's probably worth the hassle... whether you want to add a wish list item for your specific use case and hope that Calico Pie implements it, or go forward with a "workaround", is of course totally up to you.

[Gary_G]

taitwise;

I tried your suggestion with an arbitrary 6 pairs of fields (admittedly overkill).
I left out the spaces, because cutting and pasting would add them as needed.
It was a rather slow process to enter the data, because one has to be careful to cut and paste data in either the regular or italicized field.
However; the result was fine and the punctuation caused no issues at all (that I could see).
Thank you.

Once I had the first pair of fields of a set defined, I was able to use cut and paste to automatically define and number the rest.
That was an unexpected blessing.

Below is the template definition I used.

Screenshot 2023-11-07 at 1.40.52 PM.png

[Gary_G]

Sarah;

Because of the complexity of EE-style citations, I usually create a copy in my "buddy file" for an image.
This is especially true for artifacts, which would drive a person crazy if they tried to do it in the template.
Mikes suggestion worked fine, but one needs to check the display panel as cutting and pasting proceeds.

If nobody says its on the Wishlist, I will likely add a wish for that capability.
It would be a great way for Calico Pie to accommodate RM free-form imports and would help those who have "complex" EE-style citations to input.

[sbell95]

Thanks, Gary. I always enjoy seeing you explore how to use FH with EE citations.

Out of curiosity, if you proceed with your "overkill" source template definition, will you find that workable when creating sources? It seems like you would have a very long list of fields, most of which would not need to be filled in... I have also encountered problems with the way that FH adds spaces between source template fields and punctuation, so you may like to experiment to ensure that the output is as expected. My templates use several pairs of greater-than and less-than symbols to ensure that the punctuation and spacing is formatted correctly.

[Gary_G]

tatewise;

I would like to ask one think about the template...
Am I correct about the following?
If one wants to toggle a flag to hide a person's address, I take it that the control characters for this need be in the template and not inside a defined field. That would seem to mean adding yet another set of fields, since the address field would need to be treated like one of the italicized fields.

This is definitely an extension of the Free-Format concept, since even RootsMagic can't use logic in a Free-Format situation. It's a bonus, if it works.

[Gary_G]

Thanks, Gary. I always enjoy seeing you explore how to use FH with EE citations.

Out of curiosity, if you proceed with your "overkill" source template definition, will you find that workable when creating sources? It seems like you would have a very long list of fields, most of which would not need to be filled in... I have also encountered problems with the way that FH adds spaces between source template fields and punctuation, so you may like to experiment to ensure that the output is as expected. My templates use several pairs of greater-than and less-than symbols to ensure that the punctuation and spacing is formatted correctly.

Oddly; in the cases I've tried, there have been no issues with extra spaces. However; I have seen that in other situations; usually when creating templates with a fair bit of "smarts". If it does happen, I've often been able to "fix" it by adding the "<...>" so it encloses everything in the template definition code. Why this seems to kill off the adding of spaces, I have no idea.

[Gary_G]

I have entered a wish for ""Free Form" Citation Entry capability" in the Wishlist.

[tatewise]

If one wants to toggle a flag to hide a person's address, I take it that the control characters for this need be in the template and not inside a defined field. That would seem to mean adding yet another set of fields, since the address field would need to be treated like one of the italicized fields.

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to achieve.
It would help me if you explain more clearly where the items exist.

I guess that the person's address is held in a metafield in a Source record.
Is that metafield a Text type of field or an Address type of field?

If you are asking about needing a variety of field types (Text, Name, Address, URL, etc) and each may be plain or italic in various orders, then the combinatorial explosion of template options becomes infeasible.

I guess that the flag would be some data value in the Source record. It need not be a metafield.
The template would then contain a {=TextIf( , , )} function to test the flag and enable one of two format options.

[tatewise]

... If it does happen, I've often been able to "fix" it by adding the "<...>" so it encloses everything in the template definition code. Why this seems to kill off the adding of spaces, I have no idea.

This is a recurring gap in understanding. See the Help page Source Template Formats under Special-Handling for Top-Level Text it explains the default automatic spacing between top-level items and the last few paragraphs and examples show how < angle brackets > are used to inhibit top-level spacing.

[Gary_G]

Thanks tatewise;

It would be nice to hide personal information in a "free-form" citation, but I've only seen it done in a more "classic" template. It's not a big issue for me, since I don't generally post my research or share it beyond family members. In the limited-scope cases in which it is more widely circulated, I can take the time to edit a reports citations to remove any personal information.

As for the "<...>" issue. Thanks for the pointer to the article. This is one place in which FH7 templating is quite different from RM9. So; it's not surprising that we RM9 refugees have a bit more difficulty wrapping our heads around it.

[BakerJL75]

I just came across the free-fromat templates and this discussion. I'm in favor of being able to have them and have voted. I am going to play around with some of the ideas presented here, but wanted to throw my 2 cents in.