* Customise Source Pane?

[arthurk]

Most of my sources and citations follow Method 2, and one consequence of this is that I make quite a bit of use of the Where Within Source field. Recent discussions of this field have focussed on its content and/or appearance in reports, but it's made me wonder about its appearance as part of the Source Pane.

This only provides a single line to display the Where Within Source data, meaning that the full contents can't always be seen, as this screenshot shows:

ak-sourcepane.jpg (37.21 KiB) Viewed 12514 times

In this case - possibly one of my more extreme examples - there were multiple baptism entries giving the father's occupation, and in the interests of keeping things concise I used a single citation of the parish registers, with the specific entries listed in the Where Within Source field. (This data was imported from RootsMagic, but I would have done it the same way if entering it from scratch in FH.)

A similar situation can occur with the Text From Source field, though at least that can show the full contents in a pop-up. The Notes field is one that I rarely use, so for me it's not much help that it's the biggest of the lot.

What I'm wondering is whether there is some way of customising the Source Pane so that the boxes within it can be resized according to a preferred way of working, or even to suit individual citations. I haven't managed to find anything useful in Help or here in FHUG.

Thanks for any help or suggestions,

Arthur

[tatewise]

There is no customisation for that.
See Wish List Ref 545 Edit box for short Text fields.

But even if implemented, Where within Source would still be just one line of text as per Gedcom.
It is intended to identify where details are locatd in the source document(s), by say page number, etc.
The Text From Source box is where the transcript should be entered as it supports multiple lines.

I suspect much of this because FH is more Method 1 'splitter' focussed than Method 2 'lumper'.

[deniselmf]

Arthur,

If the 'Were within Source' field would just open to a text box to show all the text included that would be an improvement.

I too use Method 2 and have for decades. If I were to cite one item that is keeping me from finally moving to FH. the lack of access to citations would be it. If I use the Records window, the Sources tab identifies the number of citations associated with a source, yet I've never found a way to view and edit each of those individual citations.

With all its shortcomings, FTM - with its Source tab that includes sources, citations, url links, repository used, and 'where used' all in one editable location - did one thing right.

Denise

[DavidNewton]

My personal preference when working with sources is to float the property box, clicking the float icon next to the close cross. When I have finished I click the Dock icon at the right end of the icon bar. This gives me almost twice as much screen space for the property box at a cost of two clicks.

David

[arthurk]

Thanks for the comments - by following the link given on the Wish List item, I see that I've mentioned this before in the following topic: Let us expand "Where within Source" like "Text from Source (13807)

At least I'm consistent...

Arthur

[tatewise]

Denise and Arthur, have you Voted for the Wish List item?

Denise, use the Where Used Record Links Plugin, which works for all those kinds of back references, Source to Citation, Repository to Source, Media to everywhere used, etc. It works for every type of record, and for any selection of records.

However, I still cannot get my head round why the Where within Source text needs to be so long.
Usually it is just a reference to a page or something similar to identify a particular item within the 'lumped' Method 2 source record.

[arthurk]

Denise and Arthur, have you Voted for the Wish List item?

I've voted for it, but it looks as though only 3 others have.

[deniselmf]

Mike,

Yes, I've looked at your new plugin. While 'nice' have you examined the capabilities of FTM's Sources tab? As I wrote before, I am not a fan of FTM (no local sentence changes, date spans, or shared events to name just three), yet the Sources tab is definitely useful.

As for 'Where within Source', my long time software (Genbox) also allows scrolling through a citation, yet with a longer portion of that citation showing. Besides, you have not probably checked some of the lengthy, detailed citation information on Michigan (State of) marriage records or some of the recommended citations on FamilySearch.Org. A normal source and citation in my records would be as follows:

Source -

European Stars and Stripes: digital images; Find My Past (findmypast.com)

Citation -

Germany, Baden-Wuttemberg, Schwaebisch Gmuend; bylined article titled "The Missilemen Have Fun Hiking in the Countryside"; Vol 31, No 78, Page 9; Tuesday, July 4, 1972.

With Genbox I can scroll through a longer selection of the citation information to write / adjust as I wish. However, a text box displaying the contents of the Where within Source would be better in both Genbox and FH.

No, I have not signed the Wish List item. If I decided to move fully to FH, that move would not be conditional upon 'this or that' being changed or added to the software. Such a move would be because I've decided that FH fits my work process and offers what I need.

Denise

[tatewise]

Denise, I have never been tempted to pay for FTM as I perceive that most of its features are inferior to FH. The same goes for most other genealogy products I have tried (free trial versions only).

Of course different products have their pros and cons, and few if any are absolutely perfect for ones own needs.

It would appear that as Method 2 'lumpers' go, your Source records are very large lumps.
That would explain the length of your Where within Source field.

FH better supports Source records that span fewer documents.
Then you benefit in various ways.
The Source record Property Box has many fields to identify and transcribe the document.
The Sources For yellow citation pane cannot be customised, but the Property Box can.
So the more citation details that can migrate to the Source record the better FH supports that.

However, I can see that the Sources For pane could be improved, and that the Records Window back Links could be improved. But it is not me you have to convince, but Calico Pie, and Voting in the Wish List is one route.

[deniselmf]

Mike,

I very strongly disagree with your fourth paragraph. Definitely not my approach to recording sources and citations and I have been working on my records since the mid-1960s (paper first, on to CPM+ and DOS software in the mid-1980s, and into Windows software when that OS became available).

As you wrote earlier, FH tends to use Method 1. So does Heredis. The currently available two major software from the US (Legacy and RootsMagic) focus on their wizards for source / citation recording (more a Method 1 focus).

Personally I prefer free form source / citation recording, not wizards. I also insist upon easy, direct access to citations, not one at a time through where a source is used. The only two genealogy software I've found that permits direct access to citations is Genbox and FTM. And, I've already commented about FTM.

As for your final sentence, as I wrote before I do not believe in conditional use (make this change), nor do I wish to wait (especially at my age) to find the software I prefer. If I actually were to comment, I would not use the Wish List. Instead, I would include a comment in the annual emails I exchange with a friend to whom I've written since about 2004 when I wrote the FH review for the APG Quarterly - before I had to quit outside activities when my "day job" became too intense from staff loss.

Anyway, interesting exchange.

Denise

[tatewise]

Sorry, when I used the word 'you' in that 4th paragraph I did not mean you Denise personally, but any user of FH. Perhaps I should have said 'Then one benefits in various ways'.

There may also be a distinction between the terminology used in genealogy products, and that used in other contexts. For example, some users misunderstand the formal meaning in Gedcom terms of an Event and an Attribute and other items such as a Name and a Citation, compared to their everyday meaning or their formal meaning in other contexts. That is a recurrent problem when using computers where everyday words are used but with a very formal definition.

[arthurk]

As you wrote earlier, FH tends to use Method 1. So does Heredis. The currently available two major software from the US (Legacy and RootsMagic) focus on their wizards for source / citation recording (more a Method 1 focus).

Personally I prefer free form source / citation recording, not wizards.

I too prefer free-form sources, and RootsMagic's preference for wizards and US-centric styles of citation was one of the things that pushed me towards FH. Free-form seemed to me to be tolerated in RM rather than encouraged, but the users here seem a lot less hung up about the "correct" way to cite 200 different types of document etc.

I also insist upon easy, direct access to citations, not one at a time through where a source is used. The only two genealogy software I've found that permits direct access to citations is Genbox and FTM. And, I've already commented about FTM.

Others know far more about this than I do and will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's possible to get something aproaching that, one source at a time, in FH. In the Record list select a source, then with the Where Used Record Links or List All Citations for a Source plug-ins you can get a list of all citations for that particular one. This isn't editable, but by arranging the columns in the output, and careful positioning of the Property box and Source pane, you can click from one to another seeing the Facts they are applied to, and edit as required.

Arthur

[tatewise]

Your observations are correct Arthur.

Also the Where Used Record Links Plugin allows the Citations of any selection of Sources to be listed.

[deniselmf]

Arthur,

Yes, I definitely hear negative comments to my insistance in using free form source styles. About the same as the comments I hear about my use of Method 2 and how much better source / citations would be if I used Method 1. While I may explain my position, I otherwise ignore both groups. They are free to use the method they wish, just as I am free to use the method I wish.

Your last paragraph suggests what is found in two other genealogy softare. In FTM, the Sources tab includes a list of all Sources (left pane). When the user selects a Source, the center pane identifies all citations for the selected source (upper section) and links (where used) of a selected citation (lower section). The right pane allows for editing of the selected Source, selected Citation, and changing the Repository if desired.

Genbox (no development since 2007) offers a list of Source records. Double-clicking a Source from that list opens a dialog (with 7 tabs) dealing with the selected Source. The last tab (Links) lists all the Citations for the selected Source. If you want to edit a Citation from that list, double-click the Citation you want to edit to open another dialog. The multiple dialogs is a bt 'old school', yet at least the user can identify all Citations associated with a Source and edit any of those Citations.

Periodically I like to take a look at how I have written all the Citations for a particular Source. Such a review allows me to check that I didn't miss something in an older Citation that I have since added to newer Citations for a Source. Or, just to ensure some consistency between Citations.

Denise

[tatewise]

There may be a few extra clicks, but as Arthur says, FH allows your Source Citations to be managed in much the way you describe via the Records Window > Sources tab and the Where Used Record Links Plugin, and somewhat less conveniently via the built-in View > Record Links command. It is not exactly the same as the other products you mention, very little ever is, but comes close.

[arthurk]

Just going back to my original query about making the Where Within Source box bigger (or having a pop-up as with the long text field Text from Source), I'm wondering if there would be any adverse implications to splitting the long Where... data between that field and the citation Notes.

In the screenshot I gave above, the Where... field currently has the text:
Baptism entries for Hirst children: Hannah 14 Dec 1826, Mary Ann 4 Jan 1829, George 20 Oct 1830, John 21 Oct 1832

and I'm wondering if there would be any problems in changing it to:
Baptism entries for 4 Hirst children 1826-1832:
and putting the details in the Notes.

When producing printed reports, my preferred output is the non-narrative ones (Individual Summary or Family Group Sheet), if that makes a difference.

Next question: assuming this isn't going to produce major problems, is there a quick way to find the citations with long Where... text that I might want to split? I know I could run the List All Citations... plug-in on all Sources, then sort the results by Citation and manually pick out the long ones, but that would create a very long list. So is there a way to automatically filter the list, or show just the long ones in the first place? Say - anything with over 60 characters (or something user-definable)?

Arthur

[deniselmf]

Mike,

As for displaying a list of citations and a means of editing, do you mean the following:

1. Records window > Sources tab > select a source
2. With source selected, Tools > select the Where Used Records Link plugin (if added to the menu) with results displaying in a Query window
3. From the Where within Source column (in the Query window) > double-click any entry to open Properties box to display where the Source / Citation combination is used.
4. From the Properties box where the Source / Citation is used, In Where within Source text field, edit the text entry

If so, isn't that process a bit complicated? Anyway, it is something I would have to think about.

Denise

[tatewise]

Denise
Yes, essentially that is the process.
Having got that Query window Plugin Result Set you can preserve it while FH is open, and return to it whenever you like.
To do so either right-click its tab on left and chose Lock Window or use Window > Lock Window command, or in Tools > Preferences > Workspaces set the Query Window option for Re-use of Open Windows Permitted to No.

Arthur
The best way to discover the impact of data structures in Reports is to experiment.
The style of Source Citations and associated Options is are the same in all Reports.
If you do not want to upset your main Project use the Family Historian Sample Project.
Perhaps also think through what information belongs in Where within Source and what belongs in Text From Source.
For your example Where within Source should identify the page or date or other way of finding the baptism entry.
Text From Source should hold the transcript of what is in that entry, and I think would be all the details you currently have in Where within Source, but using the more visible Note field is not out of the question.

As for finding long Where within Source text, that is not possible with a Query.
It would need a text length filter to be added to the Where Used Record Links or similar Plugin.

[arthurk]

Arthur
The best way to discover the impact of data structures in Reports is to experiment.
The style of Source Citations and associated Options is are the same in all Reports.
If you do not want to upset your main Project use the Family Historian Sample Project.

Thank you - yes, I would certainly do some experimenting before committing to a significant change of approach.

Perhaps also think through what information belongs in Where within Source and what belongs in Text From Source.
For your example Where within Source should identify the page or date or other way of finding the baptism entry.
Text From Source should hold the transcript of what is in that entry, and I think would be all the details you currently have in Where within Source, but using the more visible Note field is not out of the question.

My feeling is that Text From Source should be an exact transcript of the data, which my long Where Within Source data currently is not, and this was why I thought it fitted better in Notes. But you may have a point here, and longer term it might be preferable to use exact transcripts rather than just my abbreviated versions.

As for finding long Where within Source text, that is not possible with a Query.
It would need a text length filter to be added to the Where Used Record Links or similar Plugin.

That's a bit disappointing, but at least it's possible to find the long entries in the way I described.

Arthur

[tatewise]

Arthur, have you considered using ancestralsources:index|> Ancestral Sources (AS) which provides a consistent approach to creating Source Citations for most popular Source documents, including Baptism records?

AS supports both Method 1 'splitters' and Method 2 'lumpers' styles of Source Citations.
See the tutorials in the above KB articles.

[AdrianBruce]

Just going back to my original query about making the Where Within Source box bigger (or having a pop-up as with the long text field Text from Source), ...

Wouldn't we be better off in a general sense having a pop-up for these single line text boxes?

The multi-line text box has the 3 dots on the vertical scroll bar - this gives access to a fully resizeable text box capable of having multiple lines.

Single line items (such as the Short Title on a Source Record) don't have any ability to pop up - but it doesn't take much to write too much for one. "Will: Jackson, William, of Camira (Tipperary) probate 1867" doesn't quite visibly fit in my Short Title, so I have to use left or right arrows (e.g.) to move down. I know the Short Title couldn't invoke the resizeable text box because that allows multiple lines but a similar control that ignored new lines would surely be better?

Such a control could help reveal long text as per Arthur's needs and work elsewhere as well. (Feel free to say it's already a wish-list item - I did look but couldn't identify one).

[tatewise]

In my very first reply to Arthur I said: See Wish List Ref 545 Edit box for short Text fields.

[AdrianBruce]

And I'd even voted for it in May of last year....

[arthurk]

Arthur, have you considered using ancestralsources:index|> Ancestral Sources (AS) which provides a consistent approach to creating Source Citations for most popular Source documents, including Baptism records?

AS supports both Method 1 'splitters' and Method 2 'lumpers' styles of Source Citations.
See the tutorials in the above KB articles.

Things may change, but at the current time I'm doing far more with existing data than with entering from scratch, so Ancestral Sources doesn't really seem necessary. And having looked at the AS tutorial documents on entering a baptism, I'm not convinced it would save much effort with the example I quoted.

In this I created one Occupation attribute from four separate baptism entries. Using Method 2, this meant using the parish registers as the Source, rather than having a separate source for each entry. But instead of then having 4 separate Citations, I took the lumping to a further level and combined them all into one. So even though there were 4 bits of evidence, I ended up with one fact, one source, and one citation (though at present no exact transcript): it's clear, and it's concise, which is the standard I try to work to. Would using AS mean entering each baptism separately, and then having to combine the resulting facts and citations to get the same result?

I admit I haven't tried using AS, but having looked at some of the tutorials, I'm not sure I will. As I wrote above, I would use the Text From Source field for an exact transcript of an entry, but the AS tutorials show this as a templated list of who did what, where and when etc. Part of leaving RootsMagic for me was getting away from predetermined templates (there, for Sources) and being able to use free form text, so I'm not particularly keen to start using them in FH/AS.

Arthur

[tatewise]

Although AS does offer Templates for the Auto-Text transcript, those are not mandatory, and can be highly customised, and can be post edited, which is actually recommended, so the text accurately reflects the original document. AS can be used to replace and reformat existing entries.