Page 56 of the online Companion Guide states: "Note: When you display a "blended family" in the family group view, you cannot change the sort order of the children, they will be listed chronologivslly by birth order." That's not so. I wish it were. Aside from the redundancy of using both chronologically and birth order in the same sentence, the children seem to be displayed as follows: First: Children born of the parents whose view is being displayed, in birth order(chronologically ;-) Next: Other children of the father in the view being displayed, in birth order Next: Other children of the wife in the view being displayed. The one thing in the above Note that is true is that you cannot change the sort order of children in the blended view. I wish we could. Comments? Tom Herson Ithaca, NY

I agree that the statement in the Companion Guide is not accurate. I believe you are incorrect in your assessment about the children in the marriage of the spouse displayed as being in chronological order. I have found that the order selected by the user is displayed for the appropriate spouse. I think the order of the subsequent marriages is actually based upon the dates of the marriages. Theoretically, if all children are in the chronological order of the respective marriages AND the first marriage is selected as the displayed marriage, the children might be listed chronologically. The Companion Guide is correct in that the order of the display of the children cannot be changed while in the Blended view. Personally, I don't always use the chronological order and prefer the current logic; however, I agree that if the user wanted to display the blended family and then sort the children in chronological order they should be able to do so but the user must recognize that it might then be impossible to see which children were the product of which marriage. BJ On 11/10/2011 7:47 AM, TH wrote: > Page 56 of the online Companion Guide states: > > "Note: When you display a "blended family" in the family group view, > you cannot change the sort order of the children, they will be listed > chronologivslly by birth order." > > That's not so. I wish it were. Aside from the redundancy of using both > chronologically and birth order in the same sentence, the children > seem to be displayed as follows: > > First: Children born of the parents whose view is being displayed, in > birth order(chronologically ;-) > > Next: Other children of the father in the view being displayed, in birth order > > Next: Other children of the wife in the view being displayed. > > The one thing in the above Note that is true is that you cannot change > the sort order of children in the blended view. I wish we could. > > Comments? > > Tom Herson > Ithaca, NY > ********************************** > List information page > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html > > Online Support for Family Tree Maker > Version 16 and earlier > http://pastftm.custhelp.com/ > > Version 2008 - 2011 > http://ftm.custhelp.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FTM-TECH-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: 2012.0.1869 / Virus Database: 2092/4607 - Release Date: 11/09/11 > >

It was displayed as you describe last night on the webinar too. Duff Wilson, Jr. also mentioned an update coming out 'in a couple of weeks and the statement was made that FTM for Mac 2 would be released by the end of November - presumably 2011.