But foster parents are NOT ancestors, by genealogy. Jack in SW Ohio On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Jim Dell <dellji@yahoo.com> wrote: > Jim R. > Yes I am exporting the whole file. > > On reports it shows depending upon where you start, it won't show both sets > in the same register report unless they have a common ancestor like in one > of my cases where the sister & her husband adopted her brothers children. > > But I never use the ancestry report, I always use the descendants register. > > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf > Of > Jim Ramaley > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 8:30 PM > To: bk@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents > > Jim D., > > Are you specifically selecting people, or are you selecting the whole file? > > > If you select the entire file I would expect the export to be correct > because it has to export all of the linkages between all of the records > selected -- and you have selected all records. That would force the > secondary parents to create a family with the person's number in that > family. However, if the records are selectively chosen as, for example, > the > ancestors of a person, it seems possible -- in fact likely -- that the > secondary parents may not be selected. The logic used in creating a tree, > for example, selects only the primary parents; not the secondary. In fact, > I do not know a way to force the showing of secondary parents on any > ancestor-like report. > > Try to re-create my little 2-generation test and let me know the results. > > Jim R > (of course the latest version of BK may have fixed the problem. I am not > running it and so have not tested it.) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jim Dell > To: bk@rootsweb.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 7:46 PM > Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents > > > Max, > I hate to disagree in my BK 6.5.6 version of BK the following is generated > 0 @I2245@ INDI > Items deleted and not necessary for this discussion > 1 FAMC @F699@ > 1 FAMC @F613@ > 1 ADOP > 2 FAMC @F699@ > > As you can see he is assigned to two different families. If you search > the > GEDCOM for @F613@ you'll find > 0 @F613@ FAM > 1 HUSB @I1732@ > 1 WIFE @I1750@ > 1 CHIL @I2245@ > 1 CHIL @I2246@ > 1 CHIL @I2247@ > If you search of @F699@ you'll find > 0 @F699@ FAM > 1 HUSB @I2244@ > 1 WIFE @I1728@ > 1 CHIL @I2245@ > 2 _FREL Adopted > 2 _MREL Adopted > 1 CHIL @I2246@ > 2 _FREL Adopted > 2 _MREL Adopted > 1 CHIL @I2247@ > 2 _FREL Adopted > 2 _MREL Adopted > > So I am saying, at least with my copy of BK it's doing it correctly. And I > just checked it imports both sets of parents into FTM 2012. > > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf > Of > Max van Dam > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 7:08 PM > To: bk@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents > > Thanks Jim. > > For this moment I think also that there is a problem in BK. > > With my best regards, > > Max van Dam > Rechovot > Israel > http://www.maxvandam.info/ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jim Ramaley > To: bk@rootsweb.com > Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 12:52 AM > Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents > > > Max, > I do not have the latest version, but It is very easy to see if it is a > problem with BK. > > 1. Choose any person with two sets of persons; say it is person #1. > 2. In the Gedcom export dialog box, click "Selected People" > 3. In the number of generations, put 2. > 4. In the "Select the people to copy to the Gedcom file", click > "Ancestors > of a person" > 5. In the Select person" box, put the number of the person with two sets > of parents: in my example, #1 > 6. If both sets of parents were actually selected, the next screen > (actually the "Select the people..." again) would show 5 people selected > -- > the person with 2 parents and both sets of parents (if they are all > distinct). > > In the version I am using, only 3 people are selected. > > You have brought up a serious question. > Jim R > Gettysburg, PA > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Max van Dam > To: bk@rootsweb.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:16 PM > Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents > > > Dear Otto, > > I work with BK 6.5.6 > > I did indeed the steps as you mentioned. > > I have made a gedcom starting by myself and a gedcom starting with my > mother. In these gedcoms I miss my fosterparents. > > If I make a gedcom starting with my foster-parents than I miss my > natural parents. > > I had hoped to see something like two marriages. > > I'm not sure that it is not a problem in BK. > > With my best regards, > > Max van Dam > Rechovot > Israel > http://www.maxvandam.info/ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Otto Jørgensen > To: bk@rootsweb.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 9:57 PM > Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents > > > On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:35:11 +0200, "Max van Dam" > <vandam@actcom.co.il> wrote: > > >I need your help. > > > >After WO II I was an orphan. After WO II I have had foster parents. > > >They have treated me as their own son, but did not adopt me > >afficially. > > > >I have now the following problem. > > > >It is no problem in BK to connect both parents families to me, but > if > I make > >a gedcom and bring that to the program to the program which I use > to > >publish my database, I see than only the connection between my > >foster-parents and me. > > > >For this moment I do not know in which program is the problem > either > BK > > or HUMO-gen that I use for my site. > > > >Can somebody tell me is there an official gedcom code for foster > parents? > > > > I believe you use latest versikon of BK > > I believe you have added you as foster to Your Fosterparents and > that > you also have marked the bilogical parents as BK tells you. > > You can then make a short gedcom from BK and open if in Notepad and > see that you have "all parents" in the Gedcom file. > > I believe the problem is in the program you use to present the > result, > not BK. > > You can see a report in BK where it says who is your bilogical > parents > and who are your fosterparents > -- > Otto Jørgensen > http://www.bkwin.info/ > All email is checked by NORTON > > > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > > > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > > > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message >

I need your help. After WO II I was an orphan. After WO II I have had foster parents. They have treated me as their own son, but did not adopt me officially. I have now the following problem. It is no problem in BK to connect both parents families to me, but if I make a gedcom and bring that to the program to the program which I use to publish my database, I see than only the connection between my foster-parents and me. For this moment I do not know in which program is the problem either BK or HUMO-gen that I use for my site. Can somebody tell me is there an official gedcom code for foster parents? With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/

Jim R. Yes I am exporting the whole file. On reports it shows depending upon where you start, it won't show both sets in the same register report unless they have a common ancestor like in one of my cases where the sister & her husband adopted her brothers children. But I never use the ancestry report, I always use the descendants register. Jim -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jim Ramaley Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 8:30 PM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Jim D., Are you specifically selecting people, or are you selecting the whole file? If you select the entire file I would expect the export to be correct because it has to export all of the linkages between all of the records selected -- and you have selected all records. That would force the secondary parents to create a family with the person's number in that family. However, if the records are selectively chosen as, for example, the ancestors of a person, it seems possible -- in fact likely -- that the secondary parents may not be selected. The logic used in creating a tree, for example, selects only the primary parents; not the secondary. In fact, I do not know a way to force the showing of secondary parents on any ancestor-like report. Try to re-create my little 2-generation test and let me know the results. Jim R (of course the latest version of BK may have fixed the problem. I am not running it and so have not tested it.) ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Dell To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 7:46 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Max, I hate to disagree in my BK 6.5.6 version of BK the following is generated 0 @I2245@ INDI Items deleted and not necessary for this discussion 1 FAMC @F699@ 1 FAMC @F613@ 1 ADOP 2 FAMC @F699@ As you can see he is assigned to two different families. If you search the GEDCOM for @F613@ you'll find 0 @F613@ FAM 1 HUSB @I1732@ 1 WIFE @I1750@ 1 CHIL @I2245@ 1 CHIL @I2246@ 1 CHIL @I2247@ If you search of @F699@ you'll find 0 @F699@ FAM 1 HUSB @I2244@ 1 WIFE @I1728@ 1 CHIL @I2245@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted 1 CHIL @I2246@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted 1 CHIL @I2247@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted So I am saying, at least with my copy of BK it's doing it correctly. And I just checked it imports both sets of parents into FTM 2012. Jim -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Max van Dam Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 7:08 PM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Thanks Jim. For this moment I think also that there is a problem in BK. With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Ramaley To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 12:52 AM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Max, I do not have the latest version, but It is very easy to see if it is a problem with BK. 1. Choose any person with two sets of persons; say it is person #1. 2. In the Gedcom export dialog box, click "Selected People" 3. In the number of generations, put 2. 4. In the "Select the people to copy to the Gedcom file", click "Ancestors of a person" 5. In the Select person" box, put the number of the person with two sets of parents: in my example, #1 6. If both sets of parents were actually selected, the next screen (actually the "Select the people..." again) would show 5 people selected -- the person with 2 parents and both sets of parents (if they are all distinct). In the version I am using, only 3 people are selected. You have brought up a serious question. Jim R Gettysburg, PA ----- Original Message ----- From: Max van Dam To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:16 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Dear Otto, I work with BK 6.5.6 I did indeed the steps as you mentioned. I have made a gedcom starting by myself and a gedcom starting with my mother. In these gedcoms I miss my fosterparents. If I make a gedcom starting with my foster-parents than I miss my natural parents. I had hoped to see something like two marriages. I'm not sure that it is not a problem in BK. With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Otto Jørgensen To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:35:11 +0200, "Max van Dam" <vandam@actcom.co.il> wrote: >I need your help. > >After WO II I was an orphan. After WO II I have had foster parents. >They have treated me as their own son, but did not adopt me >afficially. > >I have now the following problem. > >It is no problem in BK to connect both parents families to me, but if I make >a gedcom and bring that to the program to the program which I use to >publish my database, I see than only the connection between my >foster-parents and me. > >For this moment I do not know in which program is the problem either BK > or HUMO-gen that I use for my site. > >Can somebody tell me is there an official gedcom code for foster parents? > I believe you use latest versikon of BK I believe you have added you as foster to Your Fosterparents and that you also have marked the bilogical parents as BK tells you. You can then make a short gedcom from BK and open if in Notepad and see that you have "all parents" in the Gedcom file. I believe the problem is in the program you use to present the result, not BK. You can see a report in BK where it says who is your bilogical parents and who are your fosterparents -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:35:11 +0200, "Max van Dam" <vandam@actcom.co.il> wrote: >I need your help. > >After WO II I was an orphan. After WO II I have had foster parents. >They have treated me as their own son, but did not adopt me >afficially. > >I have now the following problem. > >It is no problem in BK to connect both parents families to me, but if I make >a gedcom and bring that to the program to the program which I use to >publish my database, I see than only the connection between my >foster-parents and me. > >For this moment I do not know in which program is the problem either BK > or HUMO-gen that I use for my site. > >Can somebody tell me is there an official gedcom code for foster parents? > I believe you use latest versikon of BK I believe you have added you as foster to Your Fosterparents and that you also have marked the bilogical parents as BK tells you. You can then make a short gedcom from BK and open if in Notepad and see that you have "all parents" in the Gedcom file. I believe the problem is in the program you use to present the result, not BK. You can see a report in BK where it says who is your bilogical parents and who are your fosterparents -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON

Jim D., Are you specifically selecting people, or are you selecting the whole file? If you select the entire file I would expect the export to be correct because it has to export all of the linkages between all of the records selected -- and you have selected all records. That would force the secondary parents to create a family with the person's number in that family. However, if the records are selectively chosen as, for example, the ancestors of a person, it seems possible -- in fact likely -- that the secondary parents may not be selected. The logic used in creating a tree, for example, selects only the primary parents; not the secondary. In fact, I do not know a way to force the showing of secondary parents on any ancestor-like report. Try to re-create my little 2-generation test and let me know the results. Jim R (of course the latest version of BK may have fixed the problem. I am not running it and so have not tested it.) ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Dell To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 7:46 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Max, I hate to disagree in my BK 6.5.6 version of BK the following is generated 0 @I2245@ INDI Items deleted and not necessary for this discussion 1 FAMC @F699@ 1 FAMC @F613@ 1 ADOP 2 FAMC @F699@ As you can see he is assigned to two different families. If you search the GEDCOM for @F613@ you'll find 0 @F613@ FAM 1 HUSB @I1732@ 1 WIFE @I1750@ 1 CHIL @I2245@ 1 CHIL @I2246@ 1 CHIL @I2247@ If you search of @F699@ you'll find 0 @F699@ FAM 1 HUSB @I2244@ 1 WIFE @I1728@ 1 CHIL @I2245@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted 1 CHIL @I2246@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted 1 CHIL @I2247@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted So I am saying, at least with my copy of BK it's doing it correctly. And I just checked it imports both sets of parents into FTM 2012. Jim -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Max van Dam Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 7:08 PM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Thanks Jim. For this moment I think also that there is a problem in BK. With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Ramaley To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 12:52 AM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Max, I do not have the latest version, but It is very easy to see if it is a problem with BK. 1. Choose any person with two sets of persons; say it is person #1. 2. In the Gedcom export dialog box, click "Selected People" 3. In the number of generations, put 2. 4. In the "Select the people to copy to the Gedcom file", click "Ancestors of a person" 5. In the Select person" box, put the number of the person with two sets of parents: in my example, #1 6. If both sets of parents were actually selected, the next screen (actually the "Select the people..." again) would show 5 people selected -- the person with 2 parents and both sets of parents (if they are all distinct). In the version I am using, only 3 people are selected. You have brought up a serious question. Jim R Gettysburg, PA ----- Original Message ----- From: Max van Dam To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:16 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Dear Otto, I work with BK 6.5.6 I did indeed the steps as you mentioned. I have made a gedcom starting by myself and a gedcom starting with my mother. In these gedcoms I miss my fosterparents. If I make a gedcom starting with my foster-parents than I miss my natural parents. I had hoped to see something like two marriages. I'm not sure that it is not a problem in BK. With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Otto Jørgensen To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:35:11 +0200, "Max van Dam" <vandam@actcom.co.il> wrote: >I need your help. > >After WO II I was an orphan. After WO II I have had foster parents. >They have treated me as their own son, but did not adopt me >afficially. > >I have now the following problem. > >It is no problem in BK to connect both parents families to me, but if I make >a gedcom and bring that to the program to the program which I use to >publish my database, I see than only the connection between my >foster-parents and me. > >For this moment I do not know in which program is the problem either BK > or HUMO-gen that I use for my site. > >Can somebody tell me is there an official gedcom code for foster parents? > I believe you use latest versikon of BK I believe you have added you as foster to Your Fosterparents and that you also have marked the bilogical parents as BK tells you. You can then make a short gedcom from BK and open if in Notepad and see that you have "all parents" in the Gedcom file. I believe the problem is in the program you use to present the result, not BK. You can see a report in BK where it says who is your bilogical parents and who are your fosterparents -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Max, I hate to disagree in my BK 6.5.6 version of BK the following is generated 0 @I2245@ INDI Items deleted and not necessary for this discussion 1 FAMC @F699@ 1 FAMC @F613@ 1 ADOP 2 FAMC @F699@ As you can see he is assigned to two different families. If you search the GEDCOM for @F613@ you'll find 0 @F613@ FAM 1 HUSB @I1732@ 1 WIFE @I1750@ 1 CHIL @I2245@ 1 CHIL @I2246@ 1 CHIL @I2247@ If you search of @F699@ you'll find 0 @F699@ FAM 1 HUSB @I2244@ 1 WIFE @I1728@ 1 CHIL @I2245@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted 1 CHIL @I2246@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted 1 CHIL @I2247@ 2 _FREL Adopted 2 _MREL Adopted So I am saying, at least with my copy of BK it's doing it correctly. And I just checked it imports both sets of parents into FTM 2012. Jim -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Max van Dam Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 7:08 PM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Thanks Jim. For this moment I think also that there is a problem in BK. With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Ramaley To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 12:52 AM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Max, I do not have the latest version, but It is very easy to see if it is a problem with BK. 1. Choose any person with two sets of persons; say it is person #1. 2. In the Gedcom export dialog box, click "Selected People" 3. In the number of generations, put 2. 4. In the "Select the people to copy to the Gedcom file", click "Ancestors of a person" 5. In the Select person" box, put the number of the person with two sets of parents: in my example, #1 6. If both sets of parents were actually selected, the next screen (actually the "Select the people..." again) would show 5 people selected -- the person with 2 parents and both sets of parents (if they are all distinct). In the version I am using, only 3 people are selected. You have brought up a serious question. Jim R Gettysburg, PA ----- Original Message ----- From: Max van Dam To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:16 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Dear Otto, I work with BK 6.5.6 I did indeed the steps as you mentioned. I have made a gedcom starting by myself and a gedcom starting with my mother. In these gedcoms I miss my fosterparents. If I make a gedcom starting with my foster-parents than I miss my natural parents. I had hoped to see something like two marriages. I'm not sure that it is not a problem in BK. With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Otto Jørgensen To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:35:11 +0200, "Max van Dam" <vandam@actcom.co.il> wrote: >I need your help. > >After WO II I was an orphan. After WO II I have had foster parents. >They have treated me as their own son, but did not adopt me >afficially. > >I have now the following problem. > >It is no problem in BK to connect both parents families to me, but if I make >a gedcom and bring that to the program to the program which I use to >publish my database, I see than only the connection between my >foster-parents and me. > >For this moment I do not know in which program is the problem either BK > or HUMO-gen that I use for my site. > >Can somebody tell me is there an official gedcom code for foster parents? > I believe you use latest versikon of BK I believe you have added you as foster to Your Fosterparents and that you also have marked the bilogical parents as BK tells you. You can then make a short gedcom from BK and open if in Notepad and see that you have "all parents" in the Gedcom file. I believe the problem is in the program you use to present the result, not BK. You can see a report in BK where it says who is your bilogical parents and who are your fosterparents -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

David; do you mean locations? If so, there is a global change in "file" "locations". I use it often to clean up locations just as you describe. Fran The Future is as Great as the Promises of God On 28/02/2012 5:45 PM, David Youse wrote: > I’m up to about 8000 names in my database now and find that I need to clean up many of the past entries. > > Specifically I’d like to be able to go through the Descriptions to consolidate duplicates, e.g., change [Reading, PA] to [Reading, Berks Co, PA], and to correct misspellings that make two descriptions where one would be correct, e.g., [...Pittsburg...] and [...Pittsburgh...]. Is there a way to do this without finding each of the records individually and changing them one at a time? Also, I’d like to see a utility that would find each record with an Event that doesn’t have any date, location/description, note, source or witness attached, and delete that event. > > A small note of something that doesn’t affect me in any but isn’t quite right, on the left side of the Edit page, where the radio buttons for Male, Female and Unknown are aligned vertically, the center button (for Female) is slightly cut off at the top, along with the tops of the letters in “Female”. The tops of the “F” and “l” are cut off in line with the tops of the “e, m, a and e”. The button works as expected. I’m using version 6.5.5 and Windows 7, 64-bit. > Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On the main screen, go to File, then Location and Change Location globally. There are 6 lines where you can enter mispelled or incomplete locations and the bottom one where you enter your personnal way. When you hit the Start button, BK will change all occurences of the top 6 to the bottom one. Be sure to make a backup before doing this. Gilles Le 2012-02-28 17:45, David Youse a ecrit : > I’m up to about 8000 names in my database now and find that I need to clean up many of the past entries. > > Specifically I’d like to be able to go through the Descriptions to consolidate duplicates, e.g., change [Reading, PA] to [Reading, Berks Co, PA], and to correct misspellings that make two descriptions where one would be correct, e.g., [...Pittsburg...] and [...Pittsburgh...]. Is there a way to do this without finding each of the records individually and changing them one at a time? Also, I’d like to see a utility that would find each record with an Event that doesn’t have any date, location/description, note, source or witness attached, and delete that event. > > A small note of something that doesn’t affect me in any but isn’t quite right, on the left side of the Edit page, where the radio buttons for Male, Female and Unknown are aligned vertically, the center button (for Female) is slightly cut off at the top, along with the tops of the letters in “Female”. The tops of the “F” and “l” are cut off in line with the tops of the “e, m, a and e”. The button works as expected. I’m using version 6.5.5 and Windows 7, 64-bit. > Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Max, I do not have the latest version, but It is very easy to see if it is a problem with BK. 1. Choose any person with two sets of persons; say it is person #1. 2. In the Gedcom export dialog box, click "Selected People" 3. In the number of generations, put 2. 4. In the "Select the people to copy to the Gedcom file", click "Ancestors of a person" 5. In the Select person" box, put the number of the person with two sets of parents: in my example, #1 6. If both sets of parents were actually selected, the next screen (actually the "Select the people..." again) would show 5 people selected -- the person with 2 parents and both sets of parents (if they are all distinct). In the version I am using, only 3 people are selected. You have brought up a serious question. Jim R Gettysburg, PA ----- Original Message ----- From: Max van Dam To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:16 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Dear Otto, I work with BK 6.5.6 I did indeed the steps as you mentioned. I have made a gedcom starting by myself and a gedcom starting with my mother. In these gedcoms I miss my fosterparents. If I make a gedcom starting with my foster-parents than I miss my natural parents. I had hoped to see something like two marriages. I'm not sure that it is not a problem in BK. With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Otto Jørgensen To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:35:11 +0200, "Max van Dam" <vandam@actcom.co.il> wrote: >I need your help. > >After WO II I was an orphan. After WO II I have had foster parents. >They have treated me as their own son, but did not adopt me >afficially. > >I have now the following problem. > >It is no problem in BK to connect both parents families to me, but if I make >a gedcom and bring that to the program to the program which I use to >publish my database, I see than only the connection between my >foster-parents and me. > >For this moment I do not know in which program is the problem either BK > or HUMO-gen that I use for my site. > >Can somebody tell me is there an official gedcom code for foster parents? > I believe you use latest versikon of BK I believe you have added you as foster to Your Fosterparents and that you also have marked the bilogical parents as BK tells you. You can then make a short gedcom from BK and open if in Notepad and see that you have "all parents" in the Gedcom file. I believe the problem is in the program you use to present the result, not BK. You can see a report in BK where it says who is your bilogical parents and who are your fosterparents -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I’m up to about 8000 names in my database now and find that I need to clean up many of the past entries. Specifically I’d like to be able to go through the Descriptions to consolidate duplicates, e.g., change [Reading, PA] to [Reading, Berks Co, PA], and to correct misspellings that make two descriptions where one would be correct, e.g., [...Pittsburg...] and [...Pittsburgh...]. Is there a way to do this without finding each of the records individually and changing them one at a time? Also, I’d like to see a utility that would find each record with an Event that doesn’t have any date, location/description, note, source or witness attached, and delete that event. A small note of something that doesn’t affect me in any but isn’t quite right, on the left side of the Edit page, where the radio buttons for Male, Female and Unknown are aligned vertically, the center button (for Female) is slightly cut off at the top, along with the tops of the letters in “Female”. The tops of the “F” and “l” are cut off in line with the tops of the “e, m, a and e”. The button works as expected. I’m using version 6.5.5 and Windows 7, 64-bit.

Max, Did you try creating a new data base in BK and reading the GEDCOM in and seeing how many parents it shows for you? If it show all of them then the problem is with the other program. What is the name of the other program? Jim -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Max van Dam Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:17 PM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents Dear Otto, I work with BK 6.5.6 I did indeed the steps as you mentioned. I have made a gedcom starting by myself and a gedcom starting with my mother. In these gedcoms I miss my fosterparents. If I make a gedcom starting with my foster-parents than I miss my natural parents. I had hoped to see something like two marriages. I'm not sure that it is not a problem in BK. With my best regards, Max van Dam Rechovot Israel http://www.maxvandam.info/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Otto Jørgensen To: bk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [BK] Natural parents and foster parents On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:35:11 +0200, "Max van Dam" <vandam@actcom.co.il> wrote: >I need your help. > >After WO II I was an orphan. After WO II I have had foster parents. >They have treated me as their own son, but did not adopt me >afficially. > >I have now the following problem. > >It is no problem in BK to connect both parents families to me, but if I make >a gedcom and bring that to the program to the program which I use to >publish my database, I see than only the connection between my >foster-parents and me. > >For this moment I do not know in which program is the problem either BK > or HUMO-gen that I use for my site. > >Can somebody tell me is there an official gedcom code for foster parents? > I believe you use latest versikon of BK I believe you have added you as foster to Your Fosterparents and that you also have marked the bilogical parents as BK tells you. You can then make a short gedcom from BK and open if in Notepad and see that you have "all parents" in the Gedcom file. I believe the problem is in the program you use to present the result, not BK. You can see a report in BK where it says who is your bilogical parents and who are your fosterparents -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:15:23 -0000, "Malcolm Webb" <mfwebb2005@btinternet.com> wrote: >We already have the facility in BK to manually enter a date range e.g BET 1 >Jan 1955 and 31 Mar 1955 which is handled properly in a GedCom. > >If John adds other formatting in BK to cope with quarters and convert them >to a date range then those of us who do not wish to use the date range >option would have no alternative. > >I do not like to see the date range option for births, marriages and deaths >and so prefer not to use it -- hence I have opted to use Q1 1955 as a text >string in a date box. The only time I use the date range option is for >occupations and residences where I might like to see someone resident at the >same address from 1861 to 1871, for example. I know daterange are in the program and so it has been for years Q1 is a bbr. for English speaking countris. It is very similar to write win ter or spring, summer or autum. Neither of them are legal to Gedcom and makes error when exporting and importingto other langujage. So by that a coverting of q1, q2, q3, q4, winter, spring, autumn, summer are also good wayto have the same effect. I do understand that it is sometimes one want to express a date in that way. It is also th same as telling, "easter 1845" Can not be converted or translated to other language if using gedcom or not by copying database. It is the same problem if the users have different language. This was a proposal to John to solve a problem for some users around the warld. Date Range is a legal gedcom standard; Q1 is not -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON

We already have the facility in BK to manually enter a date range e.g BET 1 Jan 1955 and 31 Mar 1955 which is handled properly in a GedCom. If John adds other formatting in BK to cope with quarters and convert them to a date range then those of us who do not wish to use the date range option would have no alternative. I do not like to see the date range option for births, marriages and deaths and so prefer not to use it -- hence I have opted to use Q1 1955 as a text string in a date box. The only time I use the date range option is for occupations and residences where I might like to see someone resident at the same address from 1861 to 1871, for example. All the best. Malcolm Webb mfwebb2005@btinternet.com <mailto:mfwebb2005@btinternet.com> -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of Otto Jørgensen Sent: 27 February 2012 09:05 To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] Why "invalid date"? Also quarters. On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 08:29:21 -0000, "Malcolm Webb" <mfwebb2005@btinternet.com> wrote: >I have a large number of ancestors where I have recorded the birth, marriage >or death as "Qx YYYY", so I guess I shall be sticking to this format. > >I am grateful to those who have responded to my way of doing things; it has >made me test it out and leaves me satisfied that my method works (at least >for me) if not entirely accurately. I have an Idea, but I do not know if that is possible for John The accepted datevalue in BK is Format 0 (null) wharever Format 1 24-jun-1954 Format 2 24 jun 1954 Format 3 06/24/1954 Format 4 06-24-1954 Format 5 jun-24-1954 Format 6 jun 24 1954 Format 7 24-jun-1954 Format 8 24 jun 1954 Format 9 24-06-1954 Format 10 1954.06.24 Format 11 1954-06-24 Format 12 24.06.1954 If we are usib Qx instead of day-month and enter that, will i be possible for John to generate a date range we know Q1 = jan - mar Q2 = apr - jun Q3 = jul - sep Q4 = oct - dec So if you have made the correct setting in BK and and have e.g. set for use of 8 and add Q11954 that give as a result in Gedcom BET 1 JAN 1954 AND 31 MAR 1954 or in plain text between 1st january 1954 and 31th mars 1954 I think that will soved a lot of problem Additional the daterange can be used as the program have mention to be used in the present version. This will solve problem and give good result :) -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 08:29:21 -0000, "Malcolm Webb" <mfwebb2005@btinternet.com> wrote: >I have a large number of ancestors where I have recorded the birth, marriage >or death as "Qx YYYY", so I guess I shall be sticking to this format. > >I am grateful to those who have responded to my way of doing things; it has >made me test it out and leaves me satisfied that my method works (at least >for me) if not entirely accurately. I have an Idea, but I do not know if that is possible for John The accepted datevalue in BK is Format 0 (null) wharever Format 1 24-jun-1954 Format 2 24 jun 1954 Format 3 06/24/1954 Format 4 06-24-1954 Format 5 jun-24-1954 Format 6 jun 24 1954 Format 7 24-jun-1954 Format 8 24 jun 1954 Format 9 24-06-1954 Format 10 1954.06.24 Format 11 1954-06-24 Format 12 24.06.1954 If we are usib Qx instead of day-month and enter that, will i be possible for John to generate a date range we know Q1 = jan - mar Q2 = apr - jun Q3 = jul - sep Q4 = oct - dec So if you have made the correct setting in BK and and have e.g. set for use of 8 and add Q11954 that give as a result in Gedcom BET 1 JAN 1954 AND 31 MAR 1954 or in plain text between 1st january 1954 and 31th mars 1954 I think that will soved a lot of problem Additional the daterange can be used as the program have mention to be used in the present version. This will solve problem and give good result :) -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON

In reply to the partial message below, John is correct in that BK appears to only recognise the year as 1955 and ignores the Quarter. Other examples I have all do the same -- the Quarter appears to be ignored but the year is recognised. I have BK set to recognise dates in DD/MM/YYYY format and whilst it tells me that "Q1 1955" is an invalid date format it does recognise the year as 1955 for calculation purposes. This is fine for my purposes. The BK calculations use the correct year and the Q1 prefix tells ME that I obtained the information from the UK BMD index. I record the full GRO index as my source under "comments for this citation" which gives me the opportunity to obtain a copy of the certificate if I find it necessary in the future without having to look at the index again. I have a large number of ancestors where I have recorded the birth, marriage or death as "Qx YYYY", so I guess I shall be sticking to this format. I am grateful to those who have responded to my way of doing things; it has made me test it out and leaves me satisfied that my method works (at least for me) if not entirely accurately. Many thanks and all the best with your research. Malcolm Webb mfwebb2005@btinternet.com <mailto:mfwebb2005@btinternet.com> -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of J. P. Gilliver (John) Sent: 25 February 2012 12:44 To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] Why "invalid date"? Also quarters. >Though looking at your example again, Malcolm, you say 'I have an >accurate birth date of a great aunt as 26 May 1872 and a death date as >Q1 1955. Her age in the BK database is shown as "83+/-" and in the >family group sheet it says "died at age 83".'> > >I suspect BK is getting the 1955, but not the Q1 - have you other >examples (with different quarters)? Because if she died in Q1 1955, that >would be _before_ her 83rd birthday, which by usual convention (in >England anyway, and 'I think'), would be described as 'died at age 82' >(or of course 'in her 83rd year'). But at least it suggests that BK is >correctly recognising the year, even if it isn't in DDMMYYYY or DD MMM >YYYY format.

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 14:54:28 -0500, David Youse <dhyouse@comcast.net> wrote: > >John Smith had three wives. The dates of the marriages and the dates >of the wives deaths or divorces are unknown. It is known that John >fathered seven children but it is not known which wives were the >mother(s) of which children. > > Is there a logical way to show John as the father of the children without >mis-identifying any of the wives as being the mother(s)? > > In short, can a child be attached to one parent only, even if that parent > was married? E.g. If you have a man and he was married 4 times and your do not have the name of the wife, start with one child and add that to the father. When you are asked for the mane of the mother answer NO Do the same for the other childre and you will have the same father for all children and different mothers for the those 4 childre -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON

On further reflection, I think I've answered my own question. My main concern was there didn't seem to be a way for the family relationships to show up on reports in a logical manner. A bit of experimentation has resulted in the best method to do this. 1. enter the father 2. without adding wives, add all of the children to the father 3. add the wives, but don't make any of them the [not entered] wife 4. rearrange the order of the wives, with the [not entered] wife at the bottom of the list This will produce reports with the children shown attached to the father, but not to any of the wives - except the Descendent Tree Chart (which probably isn't used that much anyway) which shows the children attached to the last wife in the list (the [not entered] wife). David Youse -----Original Message----- From: David Youse Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 2:54 PM To: Brother's Keeper Forum Subject: [BK] Fwd: Relationships > John Smith had three wives. The dates of the marriages and the dates of > the wives deaths or divorces are unknown. It is known that John fathered > seven children but it is not known which wives were the mother(s) of which > children. > > Is there a logical way to show John as the father of the children without > mis-identifying any of the wives as being the mother(s)? > > In short, can a child be attached to one parent only, even if that parent > was married? > > David Youse > > > > Effectus bonus addo bonus > > Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

David, Add a 4th unidentified wife and add the children there and as details evolve link them to the correct mother and unlink them from the unknown. Don't know where this John Smith lived or when, but if the US check the census and wives' name and number of years married column on some of the censuses. Also see if the death certificate or obits of the children list their mother. Jim -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of David Youse Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 2:54 PM To: Brother's Keeper Forum Subject: [BK] Fwd: Relationships > John Smith had three wives. The dates of the marriages and the dates of the wives deaths or divorces are unknown. It is known that John fathered seven children but it is not known which wives were the mother(s) of which children. > > Is there a logical way to show John as the father of the children without mis-identifying any of the wives as being the mother(s)? > > In short, can a child be attached to one parent only, even if that parent was married? > > David Youse > > > > Effectus bonus addo bonus > > Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 10:47:55 -0000, "Gensearcher" <gensearcher@sky.com> wrote: >I have tried the link at the bottom of the page 4 times to log off but I am >still on the list >John STEED can you help please >John >Manchester >England If I understand you correct here is the information http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/BK.html Remembner to use plain txt If you click at thje links in Unsubscribing your mailprogram will give the correct information and you can send the mail -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON

> John Smith had three wives. The dates of the marriages and the dates of the wives deaths or divorces are unknown. It is known that John fathered seven children but it is not known which wives were the mother(s) of which children. > > Is there a logical way to show John as the father of the children without mis-identifying any of the wives as being the mother(s)? > > In short, can a child be attached to one parent only, even if that parent was married? > > David Youse > > > > Effectus bonus addo bonus > >