My database is just that. It is my personal worksheet. It needs to be simple enough for people to figure out but clear enough for me to comeback to it a couple of years later and know what it is really saying. I may enter a new person or a son of some one already researched as James "Jim" R(1824Tn)Kit#20943 Johnson That tells me from the surname or first name index that James R Johnson, possibly called Jim was born about 1824 in Tenn and the Kit # is what YDNA kit that he directly associated with (direct male lines only) When you are working with multi kits and groups of lines you may have many groups that your are trying to find links to fit together. This gives me lots of information to sort people just in the index. I hate sorting through 16 James Johnsons to find my currant interest. If Jim was married to Betsy(1821Ky) Collins then that is her entry. The next wife may be Mavis(1838) Unknown, or Unknown Unknown. And so on.I do this for all couple relationships. If there is an actual marriage then I enter the dates and proofs as indicated. But especially if there are children, I enter everything that I can so that it will show up on group sheets for research. I have never had trouble with anyone understanding it yet, especially if I caution that a legal marriage exists with legal proofs only, otherwise it is word of mouth or specutlation-but this was a couple for this period of time. Yes I have yards of Unknown Unknowns but then I do not look for unknowns by name--but by who they are associated with and that BK# makes them real and holds a place for all information, whether I discover the unknown was born in North Carolina or is buried as just wife in a shared grave in Arkansas. Chilred may be entered as Mary Anne(1842Mo) Johnson Unknown Male Child One Jim Johnson Unknown Female Child One(1846Mo) Jim Johnson Unknown Female Child Two Jim Johnson Unknown Infant Jim Johnson An unknown infant has a record or grave, no sex, no date but Jims and hopefully I can figure out which partner. If I need to add clarification notes, I do that. It is as I say just a worksheet. I like to keep a paper book. Old and Old fashioned but I have lost much to electronics and paid storage places can be lost is say, I have a stroke, or can't make a payment etc. When I prepare my group page for printing, I go over it carefully for corrections and proper time sequences. Then I print a sheet. Scan it and place the digital copy in a folder or appropietly named subfolder and when requested to send to someone I can e-mail or dropbox it out. It may not be "correct" but it is informative and saves me much time when I come back to an entry after a long period of no involment. Where there is a series of wives ( my great grandfather had at least 5 that I have found) There will be a group sheet for him, and individual sheets for each of his wives with as much information on it as I choose to use. I like this program very much, because it is very adaptable to my work methods, very good base for information and sources and it is clear and concise. Thank you Jim Eleven years with BK Joyce

In message <SNT128-W4324841C2294F4370CB219C5A60@phx.gbl>, joyce wilson <momajo54@hotmail.com> writes: [] >Chilred may be entered as >Mary Anne(1842Mo) Johnson >Unknown Male Child One Jim Johnson >Unknown Female Child One(1846Mo) Jim Johnson >Unknown Female Child Two Jim Johnson >Unknown Infant Jim Johnson > >An unknown infant has a record or grave, no sex, no date but Jims and (_Can_ a record in BK have no sex?) [] >I like to keep a paper book. Old and Old fashioned but I have lost much >to electronics and paid storage places can be lost is say, I have a >stroke, >or can't make a payment etc. >When I prepare my group page for printing, I go over it carefully for >corrections and proper time sequences. Then I print a sheet. Scan it >and place >the digital copy in a folder or appropietly named subfolder and when >requested to send to someone I can e-mail or dropbox it out. [] one slight improvement to that could be to install a .pdf "printer" (I use pdf995, but there are plenty of them about), and "print" to that rather than scanning a real print; as well as making a smaller file, it will also be better quality, and the text will be retrievable without needing OCR by anyone you email or dropbox it to. I email PDFd material to lots of people - ancestor and descendant trees, group sheets, fan charts, ... (Not that you don't want to print paper copies as well, if that's been your practice. [I just keep a copy of the database at my brother's, some distance away.]) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf once described by Eccentrica Golumbits as the best bang since the big one ... (first series, fit the second)