Guy R Spangler <grspangler@ualr.edu> wrote: >When I create a book, >I see a male Spangler as the first entry for each generation. >For my girls, I'd like to create a book with their mother, and >all her children, next generation her mother, next generation >her mother... Like that. An ancestor book is patterned after the ahnentafel pedigree chart with the father in the top of the bracket and the mother in the bottom. The ahnentafel numbers follow this form and not much can be done about that. In a descendant book the first entry in each generation is the ancestor from that generation. Sometimes it is a male, sometimes it is a female. If you want the male ancestor's wife to be the first person listed, you can do a one generation descendant book of her. You can do a one generation descendant book for each generation, always of the female spouse, send them all to RTF files, and collect them all together into one document and thereby construct a book such as you want. In FO10, using the new journal feature, you will be able to make all these one-generation descendant books and have FO10 collect them all together into one single journal book report and provide a common index for the whole works. You still might want to send it to an RTF file, for the various one-generation sections will all say "first generation" and you might want to edit that. (You will also be able to have FO10 send the whole journal report to a PDF acrobat file, too) Wayne League

Bruce is, above all else, a business man, in the business of selling a product (and a darned good one, IMHO) with features that people want and will buy. That is the "bottom line." To that end, he actively asks people what they want, and this forum is just one way he does it. As Paul said, version 10 is now past history insofar as changes and such are concerned, but my guess is that Bruce has already started working on version 11, or at least soon will. Sometime before the Spring of 2002, version 11 will probably be set up and on the way to the BETA testers, and NOW is exactly the time for Bruce to gather, digest, and work on the new features, because if he does not, he will not have 11 ready by this time next year. To sum it all up, Bruce is (hopefully) making a good profit from all of this and using it to support his family, and we all are getting some pretty darned good software, so everyone is happy. Bottom line is that we are all helping each other. I do not have any "inside track" to Bruce and/or FormalSoft that anyone else does not have, so all of this is purely speculation on my part (my "disclaimer" to keep the lawyers quiet <g>), but based on a few years on this list and using FO, I think you will find it pretty close to fact. Just my own "unsolicited two cents worth." David E. Cann decann@infi.net List Administrator Cann-L surname list on RootsWeb _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

On Wed Aug 15 Wayne League wrote: > >...................................................................... > >This is the first step in extracting a gedcom file containing only the >kin of a particular focus person. (While waiting on Bruce to give us a >kinship selection option.) > > Don't hold your breath on that option! I've been after Bruce to do something about kinship and the Kinship List for years and he won't even address the subject. I liked your Aarnie suggestion under "Trees and Kin" last June. Regarding the Kinship List, it is generated from the Find or Explore List. It seems inconsistent to be able to re-arrange the order of children in a family but no way to re-arrange the order of individuals with the same surname in the Explore list. You are forced to accept the same surnames sorted alphabetically by given name. IMO this leads to a poorly arranged Kinship List. For example, a grandchild whose given name begins with "A" will be listed before a grandparent whose given name begins with "Z". It doesn't make much sense to me. Charles Gohlke

I might as well add my two cents too. I would like to see the women featured in reports, specifically the book. I'm not saying this very well. When I create a book, I see a male Spangler as the first entry for each generation. For my girls, I'd like to create a book with their mother, and all her children, next generation her mother, next generation her mother... Like that. Maybe that's already something I can do by building a custom report, but I haven't found out how on my own. At least not with the nice prose style of the book. I'm also not running version nine, so maybe the point is moot. Thanks for listening. Guy R Spangler, Database Administrator, University of Arkansas USMailNet: 2801 S University Ave FH211, Little Rock AR 72204 InterNet: grspanlger@ualr.edu, AT&TNet: 501-569-8705 WWW: http://www.ualr.edu/~grspangler/

You can download the Kinko File Prep Tool from http://www.kinkos.com and click on the link "free KFP software", click on "start download". The file names is kfpsetup.exe and 4.56MB. Install by double clicking on the downloaded file name. Using this tool will properly format your output for Kinkos to print large format charts. Your local Kinkos should be able to help you further. Gordon Young (Not a Kinkos employee or any particular fan) -----Original Message----- From: RuthAnn Jones [mailto:poofie@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 7:56 PM To: FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: Subject: Re: [FO] Software Development Cycle Sue, Let us know if Alfred's suggestion works. I to would like to print large charts at Kinko's. If it doesn't work we need to put it on the official suggestion list. -----Snip------- Large printouts! If you check with Kinko's and see what printer they are using, set your computer to output to that printer, (If you can find the drivers) Set the paper size, then see what Family Origins output to the screen looks like. If it looks right, capture the printer port output to a file and trot down to Kinko's with the file on a floppy and see what they can do with it. (you have to fool your computer into thinking you have that printer connected, then divert the output to a PRN file, which is not the same as printing to a genetic text file. I could do that in DOS, but I cannot remember how to do it with Windows. ) Ok I think I found it: After the imaginary printer is set up, left click on it and select it's properties, Click on the "Details" tab to show it, then click on the "Capture printer port" button. In the Path slot, enter the path and filename you want to save the file to. You might want to check the "Reconnect at logon" that looks to me to be the way to stop printing to a file in case you forget next time. But it wont help if you have a real printer set on this port, because it will get commands it cannot understand. I don't know that this will work, but with my Epson, I can set the paper size to 9'5" by 44" and the screen output shows that it takes just 4 sheets to print my 8 generation ancestor box chart, but I don't have any paper this size <{;-( Good luck, Alfred ==== FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS Mailing List ==== UNSUBSCRIBE? Send the word: UNSUBSCRIBE(inside the message) and no additional text to: FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-L-request@rootsweb.com or FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-D-request@rootsweb.com for DIGEST ============================== Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp

Attn: Bruce Following ancestral lines in the pedigree is easy, you just click on the right arrows until you get to the end of the chosen line. Following the path back down, however, is a bit more complex since there can be multiple lines from a given ancestor. And unless you have a very good memory, you cannot remember which person you came from. It can be very time consuming. Thanks for listing to us. Mary PS. Sure will be glad when V.10 arrives

Attn: Bruce Rather than showing just one child in the leftmost position of the pedigree, I would like for the on-screen pedigree chart to show a listing of all of the children and I would like for the program to indicate which of the children are the lineal ancestors of the root person and to display a code to identify whether it's the paternal or maternal line of the root person. In other words, if there are 12 children and you (the root person) are a descendant of two of them, all 12 should be listed (maybe a scroll box?), the lineal ancestors should have arrows like the leftmost person in the pedigree. Mary

On my wish list would be the following: When I update an entry a flag would be set that would allow me the choice of printing an updated family group sheet. I had this feature years ago on a shareware program and I found it so valuable. I never missed keeping my hard copy updated. Linda Nebrich Beilein lbeilein@rochester.rr.com ----- Original Message ----- From: <FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-D-request@rootsweb.com> To: <FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-D@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 9:19 PM Subject: FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-D Digest V01 #257

Has anyone been able to get the program Estimator to work??It is used with a gedcom file generated by FO, to estimate dates that are blank. It is a Java program and I have not been able to get it to open up. John S. Wilkinson mailto:jwilkins@twcny.rr.com http://home.twcny.rr.com/johnswilkinson/

John, can you tell me where you found the program estimator.exe? Is this the one I sent to the list? I have one I downloaded from a site in England and it is not very good. It doesn't use all of the dates available to do its estimation. For instance, parents, sibling, etc. And it overwrites any dates you already have if they have a qualifier like abt, aft, bef, etc. For any Java based program run under windows, you can download the Java run-time files from this site: http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/jre/download-windows.html Norma

I think what is important to note here is that rootsweb will not FORWARD any attachments - regardless of type. e.g. If you send an email with an attachment, rootsweb will strip off the attachment and only send the email itself. On the other hand, rootsweb might well send the digest as an attachment to an email but that is totally different than passing through what might well be a virus. -- Happy Hunting!! -- Paul Houston, TX, USA ICQ #73314929 Researching: VA - WHITE,LIPSCOMB,HILL,JOHNSON,SAUNDERS, TALBOT,TATE,EVANS NC - SMITH, BOSWELL, RHODES, CAPEHART,MORRIS, MARSHE, BRITT,SHAW View my American Ancestry at: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~paulrsmith **************** FREE Credit Card Referral Program. Quick money AND residual, lifetime income! CHECK IT OUT !! http://smithecomservices.tripod.com *************************************** ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jerry Bryan" <c24m48@hotmail.com> To: <FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 12:03 AM Subject: Re: [FO] Off Topic Reply - Virus Concerns > >No, they are not attachments, they are *seen* as attachments in some > >mail programs. > > I don't know that there is one official, right answer as to whether the > items in a digest are attachments or not. I have heard various E-mail > experts disagree on this point. Some experts swear they are, and some swear > they are not. But in my opinion, they really are attachments. > > I have looked at the raw ASCII text of a digest, and here is my take on the > matter. > > All attachments have a type/subtype in their description. There are only > five types defined. They are text, image, application, audio, and video. > (I think "application" is a lousy name. I think it should be "binary"). A > couple of subtypes that go with text are plain and rich, so for example you > can have an attachment which is text/plain or text/rich. In the case of an > image file, you might have image/jpg or image/gif etc. Generally speaking, > you need a viewer for any attachment besides text/plain, and E-mail systems > are usually designed to allow viewers to be integrated into the E-mail > system. > > The most dangerous attachments are the ones of type application. For > example, an attachment with a type/subtype of application/msword might be a > Microsoft Word document that might contain a macro virus. The E-mail system > itself would probably not execute the macro virus. Rather, the E-mail > system would invoke Microsoft Word as the viewer, and Microsoft word would > execute the macro virus. > > Most E-mail clients tend to sort of hide this type/subtype stuff from you, > but if you can get at the raw ASCII text of the E-mail you can see it. What > E-mail clients do instead is to commit "magic". You simply click on the > attachment, the correct viewer is invoked, and there you go. > > Anyway, when I have looked at the raw ASCII text of an E-mail digest, each > message within the digest is an attachment of type/subtype text/RFC822. The > subtype of RFC822 simply means that the text was originally an E-mail. > RFC822 is the name of the most fundamental of the various official documents > which define Internet standards for E-mail. > > So in my opinion, when an E-mail expert and guru swears on a stack of bibles > that digests do not contain attachments, they are simply wrong. Digests > contain attachments of type/subtype text/RFC822. However, these are > extremely safe attachments. > > I think this is an issue because rootsweb says that they don't send > attachments. But to make such a statement, they have to declare attachments > which are text/RFC822 as "not attachments", even though they manifestly are. > Just to confuse things further, most E-mail clients present the > text/RFC822 attachments as if they were not attachments. > > Back to the statement that digests are not attachments but they are *seen* > as attachments by some E-mail clients. I think it's just the reverse. > Digests *absolutely do* include attachments. Saying otherwise doesn't make > it so. But digests definitely are not *seen* as attachments by most E-mail > clients. Most E-mail clients hide that little detail from you. > > I said that text/RFC822 attachments are safe. Well, yes and no. The ones > from rootsweb are safe. But here's the reason I said "yes and no". A > text/RFC822 attachment can be (and usually is) an exact copy of a complete > E-mail, including any attachments that the original E-mail might have > included, and including any dangerous attachments that the original E-mail > might have included. So if you are running an E-mail client that presents > text/RFC822 attachments to you as if they were attachments, and if it lets > you "drill down" to those text/RFC822 attachments and open them like > original E-mails, then you can still be bitten by an included (lower level, > if you will) attachment. > > Digests are one kind of E-mail which creates text/RFC822 attachments. In > addiiton, some (probably not most) E-mail clients create text/RFC822 > attachments when you forward an E-mail. The attachment is simply the > complete text (including any attachments and therefore including any > viruses) that the original E-mail included before it was forwarded. > > I hope this makes sense. It's a lot easier to see if you can study the > full, raw ASCII text of an digest. And it's a lot easier to see if you have > access to an E-mail client that lets you see explicitly and drill down to > text/RFC822 attachments. If your E-mail client will let you do neither > thing, then you may wonder what I have been smoking. > > But in summary, rootsweb digests are safe, no matter which E-mail client you > might be using, and no matter how it displays text/RFC822 attachments. > > Jerry Bryan > > > ____________________________________________________________ _____ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > ==== FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS Mailing List ==== > UNSUBSCRIBE? Send the word: UNSUBSCRIBE(inside the message) and no additional text to: FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-L-request@rootsweb.com or FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-D-request@rootsweb.com for DIGEST > > ============================== > Create a FREE family website at MyFamily.com! > http://www.myfamily.com/banner.asp?ID=RWLIST2 >

I found that if I setup an HP Large format printer (HP 750 C Plus/PS) I can select large scale pages from that setup and then print to a postscript file. This can be printed by the boys in the blueprint shops on the large format HP printer. I've done this with my brother who is an engineer with the county in MN. They have access to the large format printer. I ran a trial of a 3ft x 4 ft to see how the transfer would work. Just fine!. You can go to the HP site and look for the HP 750 format printers. From there you can download the drivers. Just set the destination to FILE when you do the setup of the printer and when you print to that one, it will have a popup window that lets you designate name and location. The extension may be .prn, but if you change it to .ps, the printer programs for the big ones will recognize the format. (it really is a postscrpt file, but windows is too dumb to put the right extension on it. <G>). Keith Thompson Norma Thompson wrote: > > You could also print it to a "ghost" plotter and take it to the blueprint > boys and have it printed on huge blueprint paper. > > Norma > > ==== FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS Mailing List ==== > GETTING THE MOST OUT OF FAMILY ORIGINS by Bruce Buzbee - FO DEMO > http://formalsoft.com NO WEB ACCESS? Write to FormalSoft@aol.com for ordering information. > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 > Source for Family History Online. Go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB -- Keith Thompson, Worthington, OH Home Web Page: http://freepages.family.rootsweb.com/~kthompson/ Genealogy Web Page: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~kthompson Efax # (419) 818-1912 JFax & Voicemail (530) 484-3831

This isn't hounding, Mary Jean, this is helping Bruce do his job (note his message where he requested that we put all of these ideas into the official wish list at his site). Version 10 is in the can and Bruce is beginning a new development cycle which begins with choosing what new features will go into version 11. What we're doing here is letting the developers know what we, the users, want in their program - it is part and parcel of the development cycle. Bruce needs our feedback so he can pick and choose those items which a.) are wanted/needed by the most people, b.) will form a list of new features for the next release that he thinks he can accomplish in the time frame given and c.) produce a revision with new features that he thinks will sell (not necessarily in that order <g>). This is the fun part of this list; we do this every year so sit back, put your thinking cap on and help us mold, modify and enhance FOW to be a better, friendlier, more powerful genealogy program. -- Happy Hunting!! -- Paul Houston, TX, USA ICQ #73314929 Researching: VA - WHITE,LIPSCOMB,HILL,JOHNSON,SAUNDERS, TALBOT,TATE,EVANS NC - SMITH, BOSWELL, RHODES, CAPEHART,MORRIS, MARSHE, BRITT,SHAW View my American Ancestry at: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~paulrsmith **************** FREE Credit Card Referral Program. Quick money AND residual, lifetime income! CHECK IT OUT !! http://smithecomservices.tripod.com *************************************** ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Jean Hall" <maryjesse@newwave.net> To: <FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 7:23 AM Subject: [FO] re: A WISH LIST ??? > I can't believe what I am reading in our discussion list. We have > NOT yet received V.10 and you are already hounding Bruce about > the changes that you would like to see in V.11. > > I don't understand people anymore. > > Mary Jean Hall > > > ==== FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS Mailing List ==== > FAMILY ORIGINS - Ordering, UPDATES, books, FAQ, FREE DEMO, Newsletter, etc. http://formalsoft.com For the 8.03 and 9.02 PATCHES and what they fix, go to: http://formalsoft.com/files.htm > > ============================== > Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp >

I can't believe what I am reading in our discussion list. We have NOT yet received V.10 and you are already hounding Bruce about the changes that you would like to see in V.11. I don't understand people anymore. Mary Jean Hall

Re: Jessie Davis I hope that this is what you are referring to. When I enter anyone into my database, I use the Ref. No. fact. I have a code for each of my direct family names, ex. Robinson- RBS, Dougall-DGL, Hunter-HNT so that when I enter John Smith who has married a Dougall cousin 5 x removed I enter DGL in the Ref. fact, then I can automatically see what line he is connected to. Hope that makes some sense. Linda V. (new to the list and FO9)

Thank you Alfred and Betty. I believe I have found the problem. I have 9.02 FO and had structured the system by putting the several data files in separate folders into another Origins data folder. I had just created a new file and had begun to enter individuals. After the "troubles" and as a trial, I moved the Origins Data folder with contents to the program folder, and the system resources did respond by jumping up. Too long a road between program and data may have been the problem. However, what seemed to be the clue to the nature of the problem was that upon exiting the program with the option of "Skip all databases", the screen "flashed" about as many times as I have databases. Marilyn

"Jenny Miners" <JenMin@bigpond.com> wrote: >I am still having problems with Importing a Gedcom from FTM to FO 9.2, The GEDX Gedcom Explorer will convert an FTM gedcom file so that FO can import almost all of the data. You can find it at http://www.gedx.com/gedx/ There will be a learning curve but it is a good place to start learning about gedcom files. Wayne League

Before using Gedex, you might want to delete all of the lines that tell of the relationship of a child to the parents. Gedex puts those into notes that say, for instance, "natural relationship to Joe Blow, natural relationship to Jane Doe.". I don't like having my notes cluttered up with that. That is the only "problem" I've encountered with Gedex, though it is more a personal preference than a problem. Norma

>No, they are not attachments, they are *seen* as attachments in some >mail programs. I don't know that there is one official, right answer as to whether the items in a digest are attachments or not. I have heard various E-mail experts disagree on this point. Some experts swear they are, and some swear they are not. But in my opinion, they really are attachments. I have looked at the raw ASCII text of a digest, and here is my take on the matter. All attachments have a type/subtype in their description. There are only five types defined. They are text, image, application, audio, and video. (I think "application" is a lousy name. I think it should be "binary"). A couple of subtypes that go with text are plain and rich, so for example you can have an attachment which is text/plain or text/rich. In the case of an image file, you might have image/jpg or image/gif etc. Generally speaking, you need a viewer for any attachment besides text/plain, and E-mail systems are usually designed to allow viewers to be integrated into the E-mail system. The most dangerous attachments are the ones of type application. For example, an attachment with a type/subtype of application/msword might be a Microsoft Word document that might contain a macro virus. The E-mail system itself would probably not execute the macro virus. Rather, the E-mail system would invoke Microsoft Word as the viewer, and Microsoft word would execute the macro virus. Most E-mail clients tend to sort of hide this type/subtype stuff from you, but if you can get at the raw ASCII text of the E-mail you can see it. What E-mail clients do instead is to commit "magic". You simply click on the attachment, the correct viewer is invoked, and there you go. Anyway, when I have looked at the raw ASCII text of an E-mail digest, each message within the digest is an attachment of type/subtype text/RFC822. The subtype of RFC822 simply means that the text was originally an E-mail. RFC822 is the name of the most fundamental of the various official documents which define Internet standards for E-mail. So in my opinion, when an E-mail expert and guru swears on a stack of bibles that digests do not contain attachments, they are simply wrong. Digests contain attachments of type/subtype text/RFC822. However, these are extremely safe attachments. I think this is an issue because rootsweb says that they don't send attachments. But to make such a statement, they have to declare attachments which are text/RFC822 as "not attachments", even though they manifestly are. Just to confuse things further, most E-mail clients present the text/RFC822 attachments as if they were not attachments. Back to the statement that digests are not attachments but they are *seen* as attachments by some E-mail clients. I think it's just the reverse. Digests *absolutely do* include attachments. Saying otherwise doesn't make it so. But digests definitely are not *seen* as attachments by most E-mail clients. Most E-mail clients hide that little detail from you. I said that text/RFC822 attachments are safe. Well, yes and no. The ones from rootsweb are safe. But here's the reason I said "yes and no". A text/RFC822 attachment can be (and usually is) an exact copy of a complete E-mail, including any attachments that the original E-mail might have included, and including any dangerous attachments that the original E-mail might have included. So if you are running an E-mail client that presents text/RFC822 attachments to you as if they were attachments, and if it lets you "drill down" to those text/RFC822 attachments and open them like original E-mails, then you can still be bitten by an included (lower level, if you will) attachment. Digests are one kind of E-mail which creates text/RFC822 attachments. In addiiton, some (probably not most) E-mail clients create text/RFC822 attachments when you forward an E-mail. The attachment is simply the complete text (including any attachments and therefore including any viruses) that the original E-mail included before it was forwarded. I hope this makes sense. It's a lot easier to see if you can study the full, raw ASCII text of an digest. And it's a lot easier to see if you have access to an E-mail client that lets you see explicitly and drill down to text/RFC822 attachments. If your E-mail client will let you do neither thing, then you may wonder what I have been smoking. But in summary, rootsweb digests are safe, no matter which E-mail client you might be using, and no matter how it displays text/RFC822 attachments. Jerry Bryan _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

I know people who say they have used Kinko's program successfully. I personally have not used it. I live in a large metro area and know that my local Kinko's will handle many things for me, including printing photos and documents from my zip disks, CDs or floppies to copy paper or professional photo paper, etc. My tree isn't large enough to require them printing it out with looooonnnnnnng landscape options <grin>. Elaine elainetm@home.com etm1935@yahoo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Chapman" <johnjay@nycap.rr.com> To: <FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 12:08 AM Subject: Re: Subject: Re: [FO] Software Development Cycle > You may want to go to > http://www.kinkos.com/ > and the bottom right hand corner read about Kinko's prep file. > It's a program for PC's that is supposed to let you save your documents > on disk in a format that Kinko can use without any problems. > > I have NOT tried it yet, so don't know how it works, but someone had > told me about it and said it was pretty good. > > Just a suggestion.