Yes, FAM is a GEDCOM tag -- (wasn't thinking about this) BUT it is NOT an event. It is a special identifier automatically generated by all programs during GED export showing the links between family members. Your FAM user defined event is not the same as the FAM GEDCOM tag. CFT-Win will not treat your FAM event the same as the GEDCOM FAM tag. Not sure what you were trying to - but could really confuse programs if you ever created a FAM event and then checked the box that said this was a GEDCOM standard tag. This will only result in havoc. Ira At 10:18 AM 9/4/01 -0400, you wrote: >I had included a source in my previous e-mail that FAM is a GEDCOM 5.5 >standard event. It is not ficticious, as you have noted. > >------ from previous e-mail ---------- >source: >http://www.gendex.com/gedcom55/55gcappa.htm > >The GEDCOM Standard Release 5.5 >Appendix A > >Lineage-Linked GEDCOM Tag Definition > >FAM {FAMILY}: = >Identifies a legal, common law, or other customary relationship of man and >woman and their children, if any, or a family created by virtue of the birth >of a child to its biological father and mother. > >--------------- end of clip ---------------- > >Shouldn't CFTW recognize 5.5 GEDCOM standards? > > >Karen Pastuzyn > >In a message dated 9/4/01 9:18:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >[email protected] writes: > ><< > If the "not married" tag is being interperted as a marriage tag by other > programs (which would not be a very bright idea if I was programming them) > then I can almost certainly believe that any fictitious non-GED tag (such > as FAM) will also be interpreted by other programs as a marriage tag. In > other words, when CFT writes a GED neither NOTM not FAM are GEDCOM > standards and they are treated the same way. So why another program would > treat these two "unknown" tags is beyond me. >> ------------------------------------------------ Mr. Ira J. Lund E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.cf-software.com Cumberland Family Software, 385 Idaho Springs Road, Clarksville TN 37043

I had included a source in my previous e-mail that FAM is a GEDCOM 5.5 standard event. It is not ficticious, as you have noted. ------ from previous e-mail ---------- source: http://www.gendex.com/gedcom55/55gcappa.htm The GEDCOM Standard Release 5.5 Appendix A Lineage-Linked GEDCOM Tag Definition FAM {FAMILY}: = Identifies a legal, common law, or other customary relationship of man and woman and their children, if any, or a family created by virtue of the birth of a child to its biological father and mother. --------------- end of clip ---------------- Shouldn't CFTW recognize 5.5 GEDCOM standards? Karen Pastuzyn In a message dated 9/4/01 9:18:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: << If the "not married" tag is being interperted as a marriage tag by other programs (which would not be a very bright idea if I was programming them) then I can almost certainly believe that any fictitious non-GED tag (such as FAM) will also be interpreted by other programs as a marriage tag. In other words, when CFT writes a GED neither NOTM not FAM are GEDCOM standards and they are treated the same way. So why another program would treat these two "unknown" tags is beyond me. >>

At 01:36 PM 9/3/01 -0400, you wrote: >Version 2.51x: >Because the "not Married" tag is not a GEDCOM standard and is interpreted by >most GEDCOM import programs as a "Married" tag, >I created the GEDCOM standard tag: > FAM >event type: family >edit display: spouse name >standard: GEDCOM >desc: Family Group >Verb: had children together > >Whenever this tag in in a story, either ancestral of descendant, the sentence >reads: > Bob and Mary were married. > >I make sure Bob and Mary have no marriage event, just the FAM event: why >isn't CFTW 2.51X reading the event verb sentence? > >I have rebuilt the database and have made sure I checked Standard Events >during the rebuild, as well. Because internally CFT-Win reconginizes only a few "marriage" type tags: MARR, NOTM, LTOG and if it never sees one of these for a couple then the story automatically creates a sentence "x and x were married" in order to show the spouse of the person whose story is being created. If the "not married" tag is being interperted as a marriage tag by other programs (which would not be a very bright idea if I was programming them) then I can almost certainly believe that any fictitious non-GED tag (such as FAM) will also be interpreted by other programs as a marriage tag. In other words, when CFT writes a GED neither NOTM not FAM are GEDCOM standards and they are treated the same way. So why another program would treat these two "unknown" tags is beyond me. Ira ------------------------------------------------ Mr. Ira J. Lund E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.cf-software.com Cumberland Family Software, 385 Idaho Springs Road, Clarksville TN 37043

Version 2.51x: Because the "not Married" tag is not a GEDCOM standard and is interpreted by most GEDCOM import programs as a "Married" tag, I created the GEDCOM standard tag: FAM event type: family edit display: spouse name standard: GEDCOM desc: Family Group Verb: had children together Whenever this tag in in a story, either ancestral of descendant, the sentence reads: Bob and Mary were married. I make sure Bob and Mary have no marriage event, just the FAM event: why isn't CFTW 2.51X reading the event verb sentence? I have rebuilt the database and have made sure I checked Standard Events during the rebuild, as well. Karen Pastuzyn source: http://www.gendex.com/gedcom55/55gcappa.htm The GEDCOM Standard Release 5.5 Appendix A Lineage-Linked GEDCOM Tag Definition FAM {FAMILY}: = Identifies a legal, common law, or other customary relationship of man and woman and their children, if any, or a family created by virtue of the birth of a child to its biological father and mother.

I imported an FTW database (which I downloaded from Genealogy.Com) into a new database. All dates with only a year, ended up with JAN and the year. I remember this being discussed some time ago. How can I correct the problem? Thanks, SgtGeorge

At 09:02 AM 8/20/01 +0200, you wrote: >Quoting Ira J Lund ([email protected]): > >> First suggestion is to check the Version you have. I am uncertain whether >> you are using Ver 2 or 3. My guess is 3. Check Help About and see if it >> says 3.06. I forgot to increment 3.07 and t might be 3.07. Check the date >> on files. Most should be Mar 27, 2001. This would be Ver 3.07. >> >> If you have earlier version, I suggest upgrading. Since you are doing the >> rebuild regularly, my guess is you have an earlier version that has some bug. > >Well, I planned to make a really complete message but forgot to do so, >omitting to mention that, yes, I run the latest version. I *always* do so >and download the latest CFT as soon as you announce it here. > >So, the reindex was done under 3.07 without any doubt. What was the original problem? I do not recall. Ira ------------------------------------------------ Mr. Ira J. Lund E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.cf-software.com Cumberland Family Software, 385 Idaho Springs Road, Clarksville TN 37043

Quoting Ira J Lund ([email protected]): > First suggestion is to check the Version you have. I am uncertain whether > you are using Ver 2 or 3. My guess is 3. Check Help About and see if it > says 3.06. I forgot to increment 3.07 and t might be 3.07. Check the date > on files. Most should be Mar 27, 2001. This would be Ver 3.07. > > If you have earlier version, I suggest upgrading. Since you are doing the > rebuild regularly, my guess is you have an earlier version that has some bug. Well, I planned to make a really complete message but forgot to do so, omitting to mention that, yes, I run the latest version. I *always* do so and download the latest CFT as soon as you announce it here. So, the reindex was done under 3.07 without any doubt.

Ira, I have in my Cftw several persons marked as Adopted. Preview of Events List Report (Option All events and Individual marked), the first code of the list, ADOPT, do not show the names of adopted individuals. Please, verify. Small bug or may be I have missing some step. Thanks Leonel [email protected]

Ian, What a fool am I! Sometimes you can't see the wood for the trees! Pressure is really on to meet this book deadline hence the panic mode and overlooking the obvious. Many, many thanks. Regards Dave -----Original Message----- From: Ian Fettes [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 11:58 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [CFTW] Export Gedcom file ex CFTW V3.07 Dave, You need to set the option - Include events for living individuals - that is on the Options 2 tab of the Gedcom Export routine. Note that there are a number of other handy selectable option on that tab. Hope that helps. Ian Ian Fettes Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Replyto:[email protected] ----- Original Message ----- From: "DAVE WARNOCK" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 11:21 Subject: [CFTW] Export Gedcom file ex CFTW V3.07 > As a matter of urgency due to the imminent launch of a family history book > we require to export a Gedcom file from CFTW V3.07. > I've had many attempts at trying to export the required decendant branch but > it always turns out the same......the last 3 generations of a branch (i.e. > current individuals) that spans 9-10 generations fails to export the > individuals events but only exports the names. (i.e. no B/D/M nor any other > records) Even by selecting the most recent 4 generations which includes one > generation that successfully exports B/D/M records, personal details still > fails for the last 3! > > Any suggestions?? > > Regards > > Dave Warnock ==== CFT-WIN Mailing List ==== To unsubscribe from CFT-WIN, send an e-mail message to: [email protected] (for individual messages) [email protected] (for Digest mode) Subject: unsubscribe In the body include only one word: unsubscribe (Turn OFF your signature file when sending this command) ============================== Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp

Dave, You need to set the option - Include events for living individuals - that is on the Options 2 tab of the Gedcom Export routine. Note that there are a number of other handy selectable option on that tab. Hope that helps. Ian Ian Fettes Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Replyto:[email protected] ----- Original Message ----- From: "DAVE WARNOCK" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 11:21 Subject: [CFTW] Export Gedcom file ex CFTW V3.07 > As a matter of urgency due to the imminent launch of a family history book > we require to export a Gedcom file from CFTW V3.07. > I've had many attempts at trying to export the required decendant branch but > it always turns out the same......the last 3 generations of a branch (i.e. > current individuals) that spans 9-10 generations fails to export the > individuals events but only exports the names. (i.e. no B/D/M nor any other > records) Even by selecting the most recent 4 generations which includes one > generation that successfully exports B/D/M records, personal details still > fails for the last 3! > > Any suggestions?? > > Regards > > Dave Warnock

As a matter of urgency due to the imminent launch of a family history book we require to export a Gedcom file from CFTW V3.07. I've had many attempts at trying to export the required decendant branch but it always turns out the same......the last 3 generations of a branch (i.e. current individuals) that spans 9-10 generations fails to export the individuals events but only exports the names. (i.e. no B/D/M nor any other records) Even by selecting the most recent 4 generations which includes one generation that successfully exports B/D/M records, personal details still fails for the last 3! Any suggestions?? Regards Dave Warnock

> At 05:00 PM 8/11/01 +0100, you wrote: > >I want to publish my cft-win databse on my website. My family have > >asked me not to include any events after 1920 for living and deceased > >ancestors. > > > >Is there an easy way to mark all the events as 'sensitive' without > >having to go into each one a click the box manually? > > Easy way for living but not for events after 1920. Manual effort I believe. > > Ira > ------------------------------------------------ Humm... May be to get the job more easy. Search for Date after 1920 for all Events Print the list All the Best Leonel [email protected]

Dear Ira, I have just done a rebuild of my database, and used the "Remove all unused data" function. It did what it was supposed to BUT also removed all my "Marriages" !!! (They re-appeared once I did the rebuild with "Add Default Events") There seems to be a hiccup with the "Marriage" event as I have also noticed that it sometimes does not appear if you have the man's name in and then add a spouse at a later date, then look at the female's events and the marriage is not recorded. Is this a known bug or ................................. Many thanks again .... Hugo Slater [email protected]

At 05:00 PM 8/11/01 +0100, you wrote: >I want to publish my cft-win databse on my website. My family have >asked me not to include any events after 1920 for living and deceased >ancestors. > >Is there an easy way to mark all the events as 'sensitive' without >having to go into each one a click the box manually? Easy way for living but not for events after 1920. Manual effort I believe. Ira ------------------------------------------------ Mr. Ira J. Lund E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.cf-software.com Cumberland Family Software, 385 Idaho Springs Road, Clarksville TN 37043

Most of places on the net that you can publish your GED will ask you if want information on living displayed. I have mine on Rootsweb for example and it will not give personal info up to 100 yrs. When you create an export of your GED, go under the options 2 tab. There is a box to include events on the living. There is also a box on sensitive material under options 2. Otherwise, I believe they are excluded. I understand your families wishes. I am particularly careful when it comes to the minors in our family. Hope this helps. Dawn Conner-Jeppesen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Keel" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2001 6:00 PM Subject: [CFTW] Sensitive information on the internet > I want to publish my cft-win databse on my website. My family have > asked me not to include any events after 1920 for living and deceased > ancestors. > > Is there an easy way to mark all the events as 'sensitive' without > having to go into each one a click the box manually? > > Mike Keel > > > ==== CFT-WIN Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from CFT-WIN, send an e-mail message to: > [email protected] (for individual messages) > [email protected] (for Digest mode) > Subject: unsubscribe > In the body include only one word: unsubscribe > (Turn OFF your signature file when sending this command) > > ============================== > Join the RootsWeb WorldConnect Project: > Linking the world, one GEDCOM at a time. > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com > >

I want to publish my cft-win databse on my website. My family have asked me not to include any events after 1920 for living and deceased ancestors. Is there an easy way to mark all the events as 'sensitive' without having to go into each one a click the box manually? Mike Keel

G'day , > May I suggest that everyone on these Lists subscribe to the > VIRUS-DISCUSSION Mailing List and keep up to date on Yes and no. Don't bother just reading about what might happen to you but get a good AV application. FWIW - I consider that $US19.95 per year (after the first year) to have:- >> Online or not, ActiveShield protects you from viruses, with automatic updates when you schedule them. When you think your PC may have been infected, use Scan to find and remove viruses instantly. >> It is well worth subscribing to McAfee Clinic. Try http://www.mcafee.com/myapps/default.asp? I hope this is not looking too commercial but I am now convinced that this (or another version - Norton?) is the way to go. I have just weathered the latest virus storm an reckon it was worth every penny. HURU Mike CALDER http://members.optushome.com.au/mikecalder/ Researching: CALDER, DIXON, TUSON, GRACIE D&GFHS #2979

Thank you , George. You are right and I will subscribe now to try it out. Jens Brammer, Øverød, Denmark > From: LISTOWNER [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 8:39 AM > > May I suggest that everyone on these Lists subscribe to the > VIRUS-DISCUSSION Mailing List and keep up to date on > > To subscribe, send to: > > [email protected] > > Subject: SUBSCRIBE

An excellent suggestion George, I think that with todays situation anti virus systems are more important that RAM or clock speeds because no matter how great a box you have the lack of anit virus is just asking for a disaster to happen as well as extreme the risk of cross infection. I am running a full commercial SOPHOS system but I will still take your advice and sign up this weekend. Thanks again for the excellent advice, I would recommend that everyone gets involved. Doug

Hi Ira, I wonder if you can give us an idea when the next version of CFTW3 will be out? I am particularly keen to have the bug where dead people's full information is not consistently displayed (see my email 29/3/2001 - except the latest version does show all Phillip A BOOTH's details, but (e.g.) Herbert George SLEE's details do not appear).. Keep up the good work - it is really appreciated. WPBW John -- http://www.stmawgan.org.uk/ mailto:[email protected] http://www.truro.anglican.org/ [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>