Paul, as a matter of fact, that SOURCE_CITATION structure is identical to GEDCOM 5.5 and is already supported by FH. In FH it is called a Source Note and can be added on the All tab. I do not see how it helps Method 1 and I don't think it gets include in Reports as a Source Citation. Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul via Sent: 07 January 2016 15:57 To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: [FHU] Source Citation Structure In FH we appear to have no option but to use GEDCOM source records to create citations (the citation "points to" the source). Re-reading the GEDCOM Draft 5.5.1 (1999) standard at http://phpgedview.sourceforge.net/ged551-5.pdf I see that an alternative and much simpler (but not preferred) method is to use arbitrary source descriptions that can be multi-line. If Calico could implement this, perhaps it would be more appropriate for "Method 1" devotees. I could well be wrong, but It should avoid the clutter of thousands of source records and permit much easier queries (if that's of any interest). Paul

Hi Paul Sorry about the no bloodline to inherit all your hard work. But please may I make a request ,that rather than consign to a skip, your executors offer the information to The Society of Genealogists (SOG) Library in London, where I can assure you it will be well looked after and may be of important interest to some later researcher in years to come. They have some marvellous boxes of peoples research searchable on their database, from early last centuary. Sue Howard -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Martin Budd via Sent: 07 January 2016 00:58 To: Paul <paul@dbnut.com>; family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] References, citations, sources et al I guess #3 gives me the clue. I treat genealogy as a hobby not a job. I just want to understand how my forebears lived. Life is just too short to worry whether I put the citations I use in precisely the correct spot because tomorrow someone may change (or God forbid) interpret the thing differently. I and my family know what it all means and when I'm gone there are no descendants to carry it all on so it will all be consigned to the skip and no bloodline to fret about the misplaced references. -------- Original message -------- >From Paul via <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> Date: 07/01/2016 00:30 (GMT+00:00) To family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject Re: [FHU] References, citations, sources et al Martin Budd wrote: "I do however tire from my Inbox being clogged by repetitive meanderings over some semantic minutae. I don't wish to unsubscribe or to delete mails. I just plead that people use the right tool for the job and move these discussions to the forum where they belong." 1. Deleting emails is a way of life if you subscribe to lists (eBay, Amazon, countless others). Why not delete? 2. You feel rootsweb is the wrong tool, I disagree. And threading doesn't always help. 3. "repetitive. etc" is a pretty rude description, and suggests you may not very well understand the minutiae that can in fact make a huge difference to the way we do our job. Paul ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have always found it in the nature of both mailing lists and forums that there will be topics (often protracted) in which I have little or no interest -- either because they're too simple, too complicated, or not of relevance to me right at this moment. As others have said, that's why we have the ability to sort and filter our email streams, or to decide not to view a particular topic in a forum. And also have the ability in both arenas to look back at previous topics. On the subject of the proper uses of each medium, I will defer to the list/forum owner -- nobody except her has the right to decree the rules for the rest of us. However, I believe we would all be the poorer if we attempted to implement an artificial delineation between different types of user. On some topics, I count myself reasonably well informed. On others, I'm a rank beginner. The best thing for all of us if we want to learn and help others is to be participating in pools of mixed ability and mixed interest. Helen ColeValleyGirl

In FH we appear to have no option but to use GEDCOM source records to create citations (the citation "points to" the source). Re-reading the GEDCOM Draft 5.5.1 (1999) standard at http://phpgedview.sourceforge.net/ged551-5.pdf I see that an alternative and much simpler (but not preferred) method is to use arbitrary source descriptions that can be multi-line. If Calico could implement this, perhaps it would be more appropriate for "Method 1" devotees. I could well be wrong, but It should avoid the clutter of thousands of source records and permit much easier queries (if that's of any interest). Paul

Whatever the rights and wrongs, can we call a halt to arguments and persons wishing to get the last word in? Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Lesley Baxendale via Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 2:38 PM To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] Forum vs E-mail (was References, citations, sources et al) Patrick, Whilst not wanting to start a war, I take offence at your comments about the list being for the novice & the forum being for purists. 8>) In my experience, sometimes the opposite is true. I've been researching my family history for over 20 years, so I wouldn't call myself a novice. I am fairly new to Family Historian, however, I am by no means inexperienced in using a computer or finding may way around a computer programme. When I joined the list, I asked some 'newby' questions simply because FH was so different to what I'd used before. Many of these were answered on the list and for a few, I was directed to the Forum, where I found a lot of useful information and a lot of help with add-ons & fixes for my particular import problems. I like to make use of both formats so that I get the best of both worlds. My preference is for the e-mail lists, but of course they do have their limitations and if images & bits of software are involved, then the forum is most definitely the place. There should be no hard & fast line between the two, they are interchangeable and a mix of both works very well. BTW - if a person is a 'novice', how would they be expected to know the difference between an 'operational procedure' on FH and anything else? Regards Lesley On 07/01/2016 08:37, Patrick via wrote: > > Perhaps, as a rule, the users we should have two streams: > > 1. Leave the Forum for the professionals and purist, and > > 2. Leave the Mailing List for the novice and those interested in resolving > a > particular operational procedure with FH. One can always consult with the > Forum > if a more in depth purist answer is required. > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7294 / Virus Database: 4489/11346 - Release Date: 01/07/16

No I didn't. Thanks Mike - another bit of useful info gleaned from the list! Lesley On 07/01/2016 15:21, Beryl & Mike Tate via wrote: > Did you know you can set Email notifications on the FHUG Forums of interest (or all of them) so you get a message whenever anything > is posted. > > Regards, Mike Tate > > -----Original Message----- > Subject: Re: [FHU] References, citations, sources et al > > Personally, I find the e-mail lists easier to use, simply because I'm on a lot of them & would have to go to lots of different > websites if they were all in Forum format. I'm sure I miss some interesting stuff by not using the forums more, but that's how it > is. > > Lesley > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Did you know you can set Email notifications on the FHUG Forums of interest (or all of them) so you get a message whenever anything is posted. Regards, Mike Tate -----Original Message----- Subject: Re: [FHU] References, citations, sources et al Personally, I find the e-mail lists easier to use, simply because I'm on a lot of them & would have to go to lots of different websites if they were all in Forum format. I'm sure I miss some interesting stuff by not using the forums more, but that's how it is. Lesley

Patrick, Whilst not wanting to start a war, I take offence at your comments about the list being for the novice & the forum being for purists. 8>) In my experience, sometimes the opposite is true. I've been researching my family history for over 20 years, so I wouldn't call myself a novice. I am fairly new to Family Historian, however, I am by no means inexperienced in using a computer or finding may way around a computer programme. When I joined the list, I asked some 'newby' questions simply because FH was so different to what I'd used before. Many of these were answered on the list and for a few, I was directed to the Forum, where I found a lot of useful information and a lot of help with add-ons & fixes for my particular import problems. I like to make use of both formats so that I get the best of both worlds. My preference is for the e-mail lists, but of course they do have their limitations and if images & bits of software are involved, then the forum is most definitely the place. There should be no hard & fast line between the two, they are interchangeable and a mix of both works very well. BTW - if a person is a 'novice', how would they be expected to know the difference between an 'operational procedure' on FH and anything else? Regards Lesley On 07/01/2016 08:37, Patrick via wrote: > > Perhaps, as a rule, the users we should have two streams: > > 1. Leave the Forum for the professionals and purist, and > > 2. Leave the Mailing List for the novice and those interested in resolving a > particular operational procedure with FH. One can always consult with the Forum > if a more in depth purist answer is required. >

Well said David, Personally, I find the e-mail lists easier to use, simply because I'm on a lot of them & would have to go to lots of different websites if they were all in Forum format. I'm sure I miss some interesting stuff by not using the forums more, but that's how it is. I open my e-mail programme & hey presto, everything is in the correct folder for the particular list (I make use of the filters) and I just go to each folder to read them. If I think I might not be interested in the subject, I delete (a good reason to remember to amend the subject line as the content changes). As you say, I can always look at the archive if it becomes of interest later. I'm a great believer in the diversity of the different ways of achieving a goal. If we all preferred the same way of doing things we wouldn't find out half so much as we do. I'm also a great believer in letting people say what they want on these lists, providing it's in keeping with the rules. If there's a better way of finding out, or achieving something, SKS will always let us know. The delete key rules! Lesley On 07/01/2016 08:29, D C Banks via wrote: > Hi Martin, here's a tip. I have just seen a topic on 'Child Count in Diagrams'. I rarely use diagrams and I am not really interested at this time in child count. I sort my topics by subject, select all the messages I don't want to read and hit the delete key. I can always check the archives if I need to know later. > > No, family history may not be a job to many of us but that is no reason to not apply procedures and systems one has learnt in your career. Being in manufacturing and then IT in manufacturing all my life, many times in the pharmaceutical, food and defence industries where traceability is paramount, I am more than happy to use the principles I have learnt in my hobby. I approach the problems 'job-like', but it's not a job. > > My descendants are currently making their way through life managing classes of 30 recalcitrant children who would rather be on their X-Box than study the history of humanity or other boring school subjects - but one day they may ask the question 'who do I think I am?' > > David > > >

Thanks Paul. Ian -----Original Message----- From: Paul via Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 11:13 AM To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] Problems with GEDCOM COUNT_OF_CHILDREN (NCHI, Child Count) Yes, Ian, go to Diagram Options, General tab, tick "No offspring marker". That reminds me, the associated Options button offers "Also put marker below individuals with no spouses and no children". But this doesn't seem to work. Paul

Patrick, "Leave the Mailing List for the novice ..." So, how would that work in practice? It will still require more experienced users, including the 'professionals' and 'purists' to contribute to both? As they already do. And it's evident from past mailings that event amongst beginners, as well as the others, there are a multitude opinions about how to do things, and that will inevitably lead to debate? Which is where we are now ... John --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Yes, Ian, go to Diagram Options, General tab, tick "No offspring marker". That reminds me, the associated Options button offers "Also put marker below individuals with no spouses and no children". But this doesn't seem to work. Paul

Is there something else needed, eg in diagram options, for this to work? I've just tried setting a 0 child count on both individuals and their family record but no underline appears in the diagram. Ian -----Original Message----- From: Paul via Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 11:20 PM To: family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: [FHU] Problems with GEDCOM COUNT_OF_CHILDREN (NCHI, Child Count) Never too old to learn! Family Historian has a lovely diagrams feature to put an "underline" below the text box of an individual who had no children. This will appear if you add the attribute "Child Count" to an individual's record (e.g. through the "All" tab). FH diagrams are intelligent enough to ignore/override that if you subsequently add a child, whether to that individual or to their marriage. And to restore the "underline" if you then remove the added child. In fact it gets better.

Hi Martin, here's a tip. I have just seen a topic on 'Child Count in Diagrams'. I rarely use diagrams and I am not really interested at this time in child count. I sort my topics by subject, select all the messages I don't want to read and hit the delete key. I can always check the archives if I need to know later. No, family history may not be a job to many of us but that is no reason to not apply procedures and systems one has learnt in your career. Being in manufacturing and then IT in manufacturing all my life, many times in the pharmaceutical, food and defence industries where traceability is paramount, I am more than happy to use the principles I have learnt in my hobby. I approach the problems 'job-like', but it's not a job. My descendants are currently making their way through life managing classes of 30 recalcitrant children who would rather be on their X-Box than study the history of humanity or other boring school subjects - but one day they may ask the question 'who do I think I am?' David -----Original Message----- From: family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:family-historian-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Martin Budd via Sent: 07 January 2016 00:58 To: Paul; family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [FHU] References, citations, sources et al I guess #3 gives me the clue. I treat genealogy as a hobby not a job. I just want to understand how my forebears lived. Life is just too short to worry whether I put the citations I use in precisely the correct spot because tomorrow someone may change (or God forbid) interpret the thing differently. I and my family know what it all means and when I'm gone there are no descendants to carry it all on so it will all be consigned to the skip and no bloodline to fret about the misplaced references.

Thanks to you too, Lorna. Now why didn't I see that posting? Ahem, don't have an RSS feed, hehe. Paul

I guess #3 gives me the clue. I treat genealogy as a hobby not a job. I just want to understand how my forebears lived. Life is just too short to worry whether I put the citations I use in precisely the correct spot because tomorrow someone may change (or God forbid) interpret the thing differently. I and my family know what it all means and when I'm gone there are no descendants to carry it all on so it will all be consigned to the skip and no bloodline to fret about the misplaced references.  -------- Original message -------- From Paul via <family-historian-users@rootsweb.com> Date: 07/01/2016 00:30 (GMT+00:00) To family-historian-users@rootsweb.com Subject Re: [FHU] References, citations, sources et al Martin Budd wrote: "I do however tire from my Inbox being clogged by repetitive meanderings over some semantic minutae. I don't wish to unsubscribe or to delete mails. I just plead that people use the right tool for the job and move these discussions to the forum where they belong." 1.       Deleting emails is a way of life if you subscribe to lists (eBay, Amazon, countless others). Why not delete? 2.       You feel rootsweb is the wrong tool, I disagree. And threading doesn't always help. 3.       "repetitive. etc" is a pretty rude description, and suggests you may not very well understand the minutiae that can in fact make a huge difference to the way we do our job. Paul ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FAMILY-HISTORIAN-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Adrian, thanks a lot for that. Such a dummy not to think of that. Bit of a pain, though. Paul

Hi Paul, You can add the Count of Children to a family record. Right click on the Family record and select 'Add Miscellaneous' then select 'Add Count of Children'. See this recent topic in FHUG: http://www.fhug.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=13178 Lorna On 06/01/2016 23:20, Paul via wrote: > ... I just discovered that GEDCOM's 5.5.1 spec allows NCHI as an attribute of > FAMily records too!... > > ... Guess what? I can't find a way to add this attribute to a FH marriage > record, even in the "All" tab. >

You have to go the the Family Record itself, then the All Tab of *that* for Miscellaneous / Count of Children - you don't seem to be able to access the data from an individual. ​ Mind you - it's GEDCOM 5.5 not 5.5.1 you need to check.

Martin Budd wrote: "I do however tire from my Inbox being clogged by repetitive meanderings over some semantic minutae. I don't wish to unsubscribe or to delete mails. I just plead that people use the right tool for the job and move these discussions to the forum where they belong." 1. Deleting emails is a way of life if you subscribe to lists (eBay, Amazon, countless others). Why not delete? 2. You feel rootsweb is the wrong tool, I disagree. And threading doesn't always help. 3. "repetitive. etc" is a pretty rude description, and suggests you may not very well understand the minutiae that can in fact make a huge difference to the way we do our job. Paul