On Sun, 10 Jun 2001 10:01:28 -0400, John Steele Gordon wrote: >By programming FO to generate a report including the information on other >spouses and half-siblings such as I suggested in my first post. I know of >no technical reason such a report would be impossible. It simply needs to be >programmed to make it possible. > >I only ask that an ancestor report for ME show MY ancestors. But I want it >to show EVERY spouse of those ancestors and EVERY child of those ancestors, >without my having to enter that information by hand. That's what computers >are for. It's as simple as that. So let's get over the hang up of calling it an "Ancestor" report and call the report something more descriptive (no name suggested). I think you are asking for a Descendant report in reverse but to get the same results you would have to generate a report from every end ancestor of the person for whom you are unable to print this type of report presently. Lots of cut and paste effort and not always easy to get properly formatted. While not an easy report to generate in reverse format concept, it is not something that is beyond Bruce's programming capability. However, I can tell you that it will require MANY hours of programming for it to be accomplished even for Bruce and I am certain that it is somewhere on his list of items requested to be accomplished but with a lower priority to be done due to the amount of programming effort required. Typically programmers tackle the easiest jobs first (or those that appear to be able to please a large amount of people). Herb Clark

----- Original Message ----- From: "Herb Clark" <hclark@ghoti.org> To: <FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS-L@rootsweb.com>; "John Steele Gordon" <ancestry@optonline.net> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 10:34 AM Subject: New Report of Ancestors with Spouses and Children shown previously Re: [FO] Ancestor Book > So let's get over the hang up of calling it an "Ancestor" report and > call the report something more descriptive (no name suggested). I'm sorry, but I think it IS an ancestor report. Let me give an example of what I mean, using my own case. ANCESTORS OF JOHN STEELE GORDON 1. John Steele Gordon was born May 7 1944 in New York City. 2. Richard Haden Gordon was born Mar 30 1919 in New York City. He died Nov 16 1977 in Honolulu, Hawaii. He was married to Mary Alricks Steele on Mar 31 1942 in New York City. He was married second to Kyle MacDonnell (born . . .) on May 3 1950 in New York City. He was married third to Nancy Arakaki (born . . .) on Jun 15 1958 in New York City 3. Mary Alricks Steele was born Oct 26 1921 in New York City. She died Jan 17 1967 in Boston, Massachusetts. She was married second to Reginald Hammerstein (born Jun 18 1898 in New York City, died Aug 10 1958 in New York City). Richard Haden Gordon and Mary Alricks Steele had the following children: Richard Haden Gordon was born Jan 9 1943 in Medford Oregon. he died Nov 13 1995 in Taos, New Mexico 1. John Steele Gordon. Richard Haden Gordon and Kyle MacDonnell had the following children: George MacDonnell Gordon was born . . . . Richard Haden Gordon and Nancy Arakaki had the following children: Mariko Osceola Gordon was born . . . 4. Richard Haden Gordon was born Dec 30 1881 in Nashville, Tennessee. he died Aug 4 1978 in North Salem, New York. 5. Rebecca Wilson Carson was born Apr 8 1890 in Spartenberg, South Carolina. She died Jun 17 1979 in North Salem, New York Richard Haden Gordon and Rebecca Wilson Carson had the following children: Katherine Carson Gordon was born . . . 2. Richard Haden Gordon Ralph Carson Gordon was born . . . Eleanora Cunningham Gordon was born . . . . 6. John Nelson Steele was born Jul 12 1882 in Baltimore, Maryland. He died on Aug 23 1935 in Port Washington, New York. 7. Katharine Lyman was born Dec 12 1882 in Englewood, New Jersey. She died Dec 26 1969 in New York City. John Nelson Steele and Katharine Lyman had the following children: Etc. Etc. Would it really be so difficult a programming task to generate such a report? > While not an easy report to generate in reverse format concept, it is > not something that is beyond Bruce's programming capability. However, I > can tell you that it will require MANY hours of programming for it to > be accomplished even for Bruce and I am certain that it is somewhere on > his list of items requested to be accomplished but with a lower > priority to be done due to the amount of programming effort required. > Typically programmers tackle the easiest jobs first (or those that > appear to be able to please a large amount of people). Well, that is how the world works. If there is no demand for this, then there is no demand. But since David Cann and I both would very much like to see this capability built into FO, there is at least SOME demand. If there is not enough demand to warrant Bruce's time, then so be it. But are both David Cann and I so utterly offbase in wanting this capability? I still don't quite understand why tea cozy collecting can appear but other spouses cannot. The only answer I've ever gotten to that question is "Because you can't." JSG