Ian Goddard wrote: > Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: >> On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:50:44 -0500, singhals<singhals@erols.com> >> declaimed the following in soc.genealogy.computing: >> >>> kraut / larry stark wrote: >>>> Suggestions for a good freeware genealogy program that is not too >>>> complicated. >>> >>> If you're looking for MAC and free, don't believe there is one. >>> >>> If you're looking for unix based one, there is one, I just >>> don't remember what it is; someone else will. >>> >> >> Gramps http://gramps-project.org/ >> >> Should be usable on anything that can run a reasonably up-to-date >> version of the Python language -- which includes Mac/Linux/Windows >> (heck, some subsets of Python run on cell phones) >> > > I rather fell out with Gramps after I upgraded to 3.3.1. Until that > point I hadn't realised that it didn't keep copies of media files in its > own database where, in my view, they should be kept. (G) Mostly to hold up the other end of the argument -- FTM kept media in its internal database and most folks hated not having access to the images from outside FTM. After the first few images were put in, most everyone discovered the database was growing exponentially, and rather than reducing the number of images they reduced the quality. PAF5 like Gramps has you put the images into a separate directory; mine are under PAF/Data/[dbname_img] and I finally got clever enough to put the path into the NOTES as a hedge against the next head-crash. Then again, I'm not as generous when I share as some folks. Cheryl

On 2/13/2013 1:20 PM, J. Hugh Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:30:01 -0500, Denis Beauregard > <denis.b-at-francogene.com@fr.invalid> wrote: > >> Personnally, I use LibreOffice so I can't comment about the >> ease of use of the freewares ! I write what I need with PHP. >> >> >> Denis > > Since you mentioned it... > > Can every document be saved as .doc and every spreadsheet as .xls? I > know they CAN be - but by default? > Yes, There are about 20 possible choices of format to use for the default save as type. > Do the menu items mirror 2003 Office or 2007 that needed uBit to make > the menu usable? > Can't help on that one as the newest Office I have ever had or used is 2000. > Hugh > -- Gene Young Researching Young, Harer, Cox & Sallada With Legacy Family Tree http://myyoungs.atspace.com/index.htm

Le Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:50:44 -0500, singhals <singhals@erols.com> écrivait dans soc.genealogy.computing: >kraut / larry stark wrote: >> Suggestions for a good freeware genealogy program that is not too >> complicated. > >If you're looking for MAC and free, don't believe there is one. > >If you're looking for unix based one, there is one, I just >don't remember what it is; someone else will. Besides Gramp, there is Geneweb which I see more like a Web based application than a genealogy software. I think geneweb will run on many other platforms. >If you're looking for a WIN-based freebie, try PAF5 -- >designed so your great-aunt Esmeralda, who never met an >electric typewriter she trusted, can use it. > >Legacy is a bit more complex and a lot prettier to look at. >It has a free version. I would prefer Legacy over PAF because PAF is outdated. The last release may be more than 10 years ago (or little changes after that). Also, you have to be sure PAF will work on Win 7 or 8, a problem with old softwares. Personnally, I use LibreOffice so I can't comment about the ease of use of the freewares ! I write what I need with PHP. Denis > > >JFTR, though, any feature of any program can be ignored >until you're ready to use it. PAF has several features I >soundly ignore; and so does Legacy's free version. > >Cheryl -- Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG) Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/ French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/ Sur cédérom à 1780 - On CD-ROM to 1780

Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:50:44 -0500, singhals <singhals@erols.com> > declaimed the following in soc.genealogy.computing: > >> kraut / larry stark wrote: >>> Suggestions for a good freeware genealogy program that is not too >>> complicated. >> >> If you're looking for MAC and free, don't believe there is one. >> >> If you're looking for unix based one, there is one, I just >> don't remember what it is; someone else will. >> > > Gramps http://gramps-project.org/ > > Should be usable on anything that can run a reasonably up-to-date > version of the Python language -- which includes Mac/Linux/Windows > (heck, some subsets of Python run on cell phones) > I rather fell out with Gramps after I upgraded to 3.3.1. Until that point I hadn't realised that it didn't keep copies of media files in its own database where, in my view, they should be kept. In order to upgrade one exports a copy of each database in Gramps export format (which does include embedded copies of the media) and then reimports them with the new version. The import didn't reuse the old media files and their locations. IIRC if run interactively it will prompt for a location but as I have a lot of databases I scripted the reimport and it simply used its default location. Although the Gramps database files are kept in a single Gramps directory (.gramps in the user's home directory on Unix-like systems) the default location is the user's home directory. If, like me, you have a large number of separate databases (it's too messy to use a single database for work-in-progress) dumping a load of unexpected directories in the home directory can easily be regarded as a hostile act. I tried reporting this as a bug but the devs' opinion seemed to be that the user could simply move them to some more convenient spot & update the database manually which is not a particularly helpful response when the problem arises from having a large number of databases. What's worse is that (a) the import procedure tries to create these directories even if there are no media files and (b) aborts if the directory already exists. One could merge databases by exporting one, or a subset of one, and importing the exported file into another. This import now tries to create the media directory. As this is an existing database the media directory existed so the import failed. Although one can remove the media directory if it's empty (but why object if it is?) this becomes more difficult if it's not and pointless if the imported database doesn't even contain any media files. This is a particular annoyance as I kept one database as a gazetteer of places and used this to standardise recording but this needs to be periodically remerged with each working database. Clearly nobody tried to work through these use cases. Possibly the later versions have taken a more rational approach. I could try them out or I could go back to an older, saner version. Either approach seems so much hassle I keep telling myself it would be easier to start from scratch & write my own application. Until I do that I've almost given up Gramps and keep using a mixture of LibreOffice spreadsheet for sorting out families and an Informix database for register transcriptions. -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk

Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:50:44 -0500, singhals<singhals@erols.com> > declaimed the following in soc.genealogy.computing: > >> kraut / larry stark wrote: >>> Suggestions for a good freeware genealogy program that is not too >>> complicated. >> >> If you're looking for MAC and free, don't believe there is one. >> >> If you're looking for unix based one, there is one, I just >> don't remember what it is; someone else will. >> > > Gramps http://gramps-project.org/ > > Should be usable on anything that can run a reasonably up-to-date > version of the Python language -- which includes Mac/Linux/Windows > (heck, some subsets of Python run on cell phones) That's it. I must have some sort of mental block on the name. :( Thanks!

On 2013-02-13, singhals <singhals@erols.com> wrote: > kraut / larry stark wrote: >> Suggestions for a good freeware genealogy program that is not too >> complicated. > > If you're looking for MAC and free, don't believe there is one. > > If you're looking for unix based one, there is one, I just > don't remember what it is; someone else will. As another poster said, that would be Gramps. > If you're looking for a WIN-based freebie, try PAF5 -- > designed so your great-aunt Esmeralda, who never met an > electric typewriter she trusted, can use it. PAF5 works pretty well with Wine on Linux (and reportedly on Mac). > Legacy is a bit more complex and a lot prettier to look at. > It has a free version. > > > JFTR, though, any feature of any program can be ignored > until you're ready to use it. PAF has several features I > soundly ignore; and so does Legacy's free version. > > Cheryl > HTH -- Robert Riches spamtrap42@jacob21819.net (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

kraut / larry stark wrote: > Suggestions for a good freeware genealogy program that is not too > complicated. If you're looking for MAC and free, don't believe there is one. If you're looking for unix based one, there is one, I just don't remember what it is; someone else will. If you're looking for a WIN-based freebie, try PAF5 -- designed so your great-aunt Esmeralda, who never met an electric typewriter she trusted, can use it. Legacy is a bit more complex and a lot prettier to look at. It has a free version. JFTR, though, any feature of any program can be ignored until you're ready to use it. PAF has several features I soundly ignore; and so does Legacy's free version. Cheryl

Suggestions for a good freeware genealogy program that is not too complicated.

On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 12:52:24PM +0000, Richard Smith wrote: > >Or I can add a custom 'birth registration' event for 'between 1867-01-01 >and 1867-03-31', but custom events seem to be rather second-rate >citizens in the Gramps universe. For example, if I have a baptism date, >but no date of birth, in many contexts Gramps will use the baptism date >as an approximation of the date of birth; but I can't see a way of >making it do that with a custom 'birth registration event'. Gramps has functions to select birth_or_baptism and death_or_burial. You could hack them, probably, to add extra events. One problem with this kind of approach is that an estimated birth date, say, will obscure a well-founded date of baptism. Martin

Richard Smith wrote: > On 08/02/13 11:16, Ian Goddard wrote: > >> I use Gramps from time to time & this enables me to use a range in the >> same way as yourself. It's possible to update this to a precise date it >> I feel a certificate is necessary. As an estimate of DoB it's good >> enough to evaluate alternative candidates and is sometimes better than >> baptism which can be out by a few years, or more when the register >> includes the note "baptism of an adult Quaker". > > That's interesting, because I had been going to use Gramps as an example > of a piece of software that doesn't make it easy to express what I want. > I can certainly add a birth event for 'calculated between 1866-11-20 > and 1867-03-31' (or whatever I want). But that's not what he source says. What I do is use Regular - Range. I count that as good enough unless I have a more specific date. > Or I can add a custom 'birth registration' event for 'between 1867-01-01 > and 1867-03-31', but custom events seem to be rather second-rate > citizens in the Gramps universe. For example, if I have a baptism date, > but no date of birth, in many contexts Gramps will use the baptism date > as an approximation of the date of birth; but I can't see a way of > making it do that with a custom 'birth registration event'. > > So far as I can see, this is a common problem in many programs: the > built-in event types have certain special properties that can't easily > be replicated with custom events, and inevitably at times the built-in > events don't include everything you want. > > What I think I'd like is the ability to say that one event type > typically follows shortly after another event type, and in the absence > of information on the latter event, it would be a useful proxy. For > example, in an index, I might want to distinguish a John Smith, bp 1590 > in Ripon Cathedral, from a John Smith whose birth was registered in > Southampton in 1905. Although I might not know where or when either was > born, for the purposes of a index, those dates and places are quite > sufficient. What I do where all I have is a baptism is enter the baptism with the appropriate church or chapel as place and, if the father is described as "of wherever" and there's no indication that the birth wasn't at home I enter a birth date of "before" the baptism date (ideally it would be "on or before" but Gramps doesn't have that option) with the "wherever" bit as place. It's never completely right, of course, because I'm sure that some baptisms were carried out at home where a child wasn't expected to live. -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk

Hi Richard, > This is evidence that someone called Susan BARFOOT was born, but not > necessarily that the birth occurred in Q1 1867 (it didn't) or in the > South Stoneham registration district (though in this case it did). It's > the registration that occurred in that quarter and that place. It is, > however, evidence that the birth occurred no later than Q1 1867. > > So I would create a data structure that looks something like this: > > [Person: name="Susan BARFOOT"] > | > V life event: type=birth > | > [Event: type=Birth] > | > V following event: type=registration > | > [Event: type=Registration; date=1867-Q1; place="South Stoneham R.D."] If I were to create an evidence based model, which I once hope to incorporate in Gramps, I would probably reverse this, meaning that the model starts with the evidence/source as a top level object, like this: [Source: title="Susan's birth record"; date=1867-Q1; ...] | V | [Event: type=Birth; date=...] | V | [Person: name="Susan BARFOOT"; role=child] [Person: name="... BARFOOT"; role=father] [Person: name="..."; role=mother] And if it were a baptism instead, I would add witnesses to the person list too. The event persons (or personas) listed here are not the individuals in my tree, but separate entities that can be linked to individuals in my conclusions, i.e. the tree in Gramps, or whatever software you use. The individuals can thus be seen as event person containers, that don't have much attributes of their own but are merely ways to group event persons to what you assume to be true individuals. The idea behind this is that keeping the persons in the registration part of the model is the best way to separate evidence and conclusions. cheers, Enno

On 08/02/13 11:16, Ian Goddard wrote: > I use Gramps from time to time & this enables me to use a range in the > same way as yourself. It's possible to update this to a precise date it > I feel a certificate is necessary. As an estimate of DoB it's good > enough to evaluate alternative candidates and is sometimes better than > baptism which can be out by a few years, or more when the register > includes the note "baptism of an adult Quaker". That's interesting, because I had been going to use Gramps as an example of a piece of software that doesn't make it easy to express what I want. I can certainly add a birth event for 'calculated between 1866-11-20 and 1867-03-31' (or whatever I want). But that's not what he source says. Or I can add a custom 'birth registration' event for 'between 1867-01-01 and 1867-03-31', but custom events seem to be rather second-rate citizens in the Gramps universe. For example, if I have a baptism date, but no date of birth, in many contexts Gramps will use the baptism date as an approximation of the date of birth; but I can't see a way of making it do that with a custom 'birth registration event'. So far as I can see, this is a common problem in many programs: the built-in event types have certain special properties that can't easily be replicated with custom events, and inevitably at times the built-in events don't include everything you want. What I think I'd like is the ability to say that one event type typically follows shortly after another event type, and in the absence of information on the latter event, it would be a useful proxy. For example, in an index, I might want to distinguish a John Smith, bp 1590 in Ripon Cathedral, from a John Smith whose birth was registered in Southampton in 1905. Although I might not know where or when either was born, for the purposes of a index, those dates and places are quite sufficient. Richard

On 08/02/13 04:02, Steve Hayes wrote: > On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:01:28 +0000, Richard Smith <richard@ex-parrot.com> > wrote: > >> I've been considering how to record civil registration of births and >> deaths in my own genealogy database. Currently, if I discover a birth >> registration in, say, Q1 1867, then I enter a birth event for Jan-Mar >> 1867 and a source citation to the UK GRO index (or to FreeBMD sa >> appropriate). However, this is wrong as the person could have been born >> in late Dec 1866 and the birth registered (perfectly properly) a week or >> two later, as happened with my great grandmother. And it's certainly >> possible that the birth was earlier still and registered late -- just >> because (in the UK) there was a legal requirement to register births >> within 42 days doesn't mean it necessarily always happened like that. >> >> But I'm now thinking that I should consider 'birth registration' to be a >> separate event to 'birth', much as I consider 'baptism' to be separate >> to 'birth'. I can then say, quite correctly, that the birth >> registration occurred in Jan-Mar 1867, and I can use this to estimate a >> birth in Nov 1866 - Mar 1867. This also allows the 'birth >> registration' event to have different participants to the 'birth' event. >> For example, a birth registration (in the UK, at least) has an >> informant who is often but not always a parent. > > You don't say what your "own genealogy database" is. It's a database and a collection of scripts I've developed myself. So my question isn't how I should do it in a specific piece of software, but rather, given a clean slate, how would you wish to record it? My basic event data model is the one in http://vocab.org/bio/0.1/ though I'm not adverse to deviating from it if there's a need to. (Though, to be honest, it's so general that most of the time I'm asking myself which bits I don't want to use, rather than which bits I need to extend.) At the moment, I'm thinking that the way forward is to add a 'Registration' event (perhaps with a sub-type 'BirthRegistration') and link it as a followingEvent from a 'Birth' event. Let me try to give a concrete example. I find my great grandmother's birth registration on FreeBMD: Susan BARFOOT, b reg. Q1 1867, South Stoneham, Hants. [vol.2c, p.4] This is evidence that someone called Susan BARFOOT was born, but not necessarily that the birth occurred in Q1 1867 (it didn't) or in the South Stoneham registration district (though in this case it did). It's the registration that occurred in that quarter and that place. It is, however, evidence that the birth occurred no later than Q1 1867. So I would create a data structure that looks something like this: [Person: name="Susan BARFOOT"] | V life event: type=birth | [Event: type=Birth] | V following event: type=registration | [Event: type=Registration; date=1867-Q1; place="South Stoneham R.D."] I may choose to add an estimated date to the Birth event itself, but if I do, I don't lose track of the fact that the registration date is nominally exact, and any estimate of a date of birth is just that: an estimate. Arguably, the Birth event there is redundant in that any event involving a person must be a followingEvent from the birth. If someone appears in a phone book, then it's evidence that they were born somewhere, somewhen. But I think there is a difference. The registration of a birth is closely related to the birth itself, and if you consider other forms of civil registration, e.g. of deaths, then the the associated death event does convey genuinely new information. Anyway, I'd be interested to hear any views on this strategy. > But beware if you upload anything to Ancestry.com with imprecise > place names, as it will change them to something that it has in its > database, which may well be on another continent. Yes, I've seen that before, and it's one reason why I no longer upload trees to Ancestry. To make matters worse, Ancestry's list of place names is missing the parish of Fawley, Hants, which is one of the most commonly used parishes in my database, and given half a chance will auto-correct it to Fawley, Berks. Richard

Richard Smith wrote: > I've been considering how to record civil registration of births and > deaths in my own genealogy database. Currently, if I discover a birth > registration in, say, Q1 1867, then I enter a birth event for Jan-Mar > 1867 and a source citation to the UK GRO index (or to FreeBMD sa > appropriate). However, this is wrong as the person could have been born > in late Dec 1866 and the birth registered (perfectly properly) a week or > two later, as happened with my great grandmother. And it's certainly > possible that the birth was earlier still and registered late -- just > because (in the UK) there was a legal requirement to register births > within 42 days doesn't mean it necessarily always happened like that. > > But I'm now thinking that I should consider 'birth registration' to be a > separate event to 'birth', much as I consider 'baptism' to be separate > to 'birth'. I can then say, quite correctly, that the birth > registration occurred in Jan-Mar 1867, and I can use this to estimate a > birth in Nov 1866 - Mar 1867. This also allows the 'birth > registration' event to have different participants to the 'birth' event. > For example, a birth registration (in the UK, at least) has an > informant who is often but not always a parent. > > However, I'm surprised that (so far as I can tell) none of the usual > genealogical data models seem to allow for this. So how do other > people record civil registrations? Or am I unusual in having quite a > few people in my tree (generally cousins N-times removed) where the > registration quarter is my best estimate of their date of birth or death? I use Gramps from time to time & this enables me to use a range in the same way as yourself. It's possible to update this to a precise date it I feel a certificate is necessary. As an estimate of DoB it's good enough to evaluate alternative candidates and is sometimes better than baptism which can be out by a few years, or more when the register includes the note "baptism of an adult Quaker". -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk

"Richard Smith" <richard@ex-parrot.com> wrote in message news:anifgqFg3muU1@mid.individual.net... > I've been considering how to record civil registration of births and > deaths in my own genealogy database. Currently, if I discover a birth > registration in, say, Q1 1867, then I enter a birth event for Jan-Mar 1867 > and a source citation to the UK GRO index (or to FreeBMD sa appropriate). > However, this is wrong as the person could have been born in late Dec 1866 > and the birth registered (perfectly properly) a week or two later, as > happened with my great grandmother. And it's certainly possible that the > birth was earlier still and registered late -- just because (in the UK) > there was a legal requirement to register births within 42 days doesn't > mean it necessarily always happened like that. > > But I'm now thinking that I should consider 'birth registration' to be a > separate event to 'birth', much as I consider 'baptism' to be separate to > 'birth'. I can then say, quite correctly, that the birth registration > occurred in Jan-Mar 1867, and I can use this to estimate a birth in Nov > 1866 - Mar 1867. This also allows the 'birth registration' event to have > different participants to the 'birth' event. For example, a birth > registration (in the UK, at least) has an informant who is often but not > always a parent. > > However, I'm surprised that (so far as I can tell) none of the usual > genealogical data models seem to allow for this. So how do other people > record civil registrations? Or am I unusual in having quite a few people > in my tree (generally cousins N-times removed) where the registration > quarter is my best estimate of their date of birth or death? > > Richard Yes, I have seen a lot of people record, say, 1867 Q1, taken directly from FreeBMD, as a date-of-birth rather than a date-of-registration. However, it's only a coarse date-of-registration at that (to a granularity of a yearly quarter) since it's taken from the GRO index -- the real date of registration would be on the certificate. I can't believe that "usual models" don't accommodate this. Certainly my own model (STEMMA) makes the distinction and has event-types for each. I thought it was taken for granted that there are birth-related events (e.g. birth, registration, baptism), marriage-related events (e.g. civil, religious, banns), and death-related events (e.g. death, registration, burial). Probably the most common issue that I come across is burial dates recorded as date-of-death, and this seems to be the product of local transcriptions (say from a FHS) not clearly making the distinction. Tony Proctor

On 2013-02-07 20:01, Richard Smith wrote: > I've been considering how to record civil registration of births and > deaths in my own genealogy database. Currently, if I discover a birth > registration in, say, Q1 1867, then I enter a birth event for Jan-Mar > 1867 and a source citation to the UK GRO index (or to FreeBMD sa > appropriate). However, this is wrong as the person could have been born > in late Dec 1866 and the birth registered (perfectly properly) a week or > two later, as happened with my great grandmother. And it's certainly > possible that the birth was earlier still and registered late -- just > because (in the UK) there was a legal requirement to register births > within 42 days doesn't mean it necessarily always happened like that. > > But I'm now thinking that I should consider 'birth registration' to be a > separate event to 'birth', much as I consider 'baptism' to be separate > to 'birth'. I can then say, quite correctly, that the birth > registration occurred in Jan-Mar 1867, and I can use this to estimate a > birth in Nov 1866 - Mar 1867. This also allows the 'birth > registration' event to have different participants to the 'birth' event. > For example, a birth registration (in the UK, at least) has an > informant who is often but not always a parent. > > However, I'm surprised that (so far as I can tell) none of the usual > genealogical data models seem to allow for this. So how do other > people record civil registrations? Or am I unusual in having quite a > few people in my tree (generally cousins N-times removed) where the > registration quarter is my best estimate of their date of birth or death? > > Richard I use the concept of "best available date" for events. So I might start with the registration date and refine that later to the actual birth date. Pertinent data (as far as available) from the registration is recorded as evidence and there is a list of alternative event dates stored in order of preference (in this case there could be two dates in the list). That is on the Gendatam system which unfortunately is not currently available unless you happen to have a copy.

On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:01:28 +0000, Richard Smith <richard@ex-parrot.com> wrote: >I've been considering how to record civil registration of births and >deaths in my own genealogy database. Currently, if I discover a birth >registration in, say, Q1 1867, then I enter a birth event for Jan-Mar >1867 and a source citation to the UK GRO index (or to FreeBMD sa >appropriate). However, this is wrong as the person could have been born >in late Dec 1866 and the birth registered (perfectly properly) a week or >two later, as happened with my great grandmother. And it's certainly >possible that the birth was earlier still and registered late -- just >because (in the UK) there was a legal requirement to register births >within 42 days doesn't mean it necessarily always happened like that. > >But I'm now thinking that I should consider 'birth registration' to be a >separate event to 'birth', much as I consider 'baptism' to be separate >to 'birth'. I can then say, quite correctly, that the birth >registration occurred in Jan-Mar 1867, and I can use this to estimate a >birth in Nov 1866 - Mar 1867. This also allows the 'birth >registration' event to have different participants to the 'birth' event. > For example, a birth registration (in the UK, at least) has an >informant who is often but not always a parent. You don't say what your "own genealogy database" is. A program like "Custodian" allows you to record information on BMD certificates, and I think Clooz does too. > >However, I'm surprised that (so far as I can tell) none of the usual >genealogical data models seem to allow for this. So how do other >people record civil registrations? Or am I unusual in having quite a >few people in my tree (generally cousins N-times removed) where the >registration quarter is my best estimate of their date of birth or death? In my lineage-linked databases, where I have got information from FreeBMD, for example, and haven't got the actual certificate, I record a first quarter registration as "Abt Feb 1857" or whatever, using the middle month of the quarter, and list FreeBMD as the source, giving the Volume and Page reference. That makes it easier to order the certificate if need be. I also put the place of birth, as, for example Islington RD" (for registration district). But beware if you upload anything to Ancestry.com with imprecise place names, as it will change them to something that it has in its database, which may well be on another continent. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

I've been considering how to record civil registration of births and deaths in my own genealogy database. Currently, if I discover a birth registration in, say, Q1 1867, then I enter a birth event for Jan-Mar 1867 and a source citation to the UK GRO index (or to FreeBMD sa appropriate). However, this is wrong as the person could have been born in late Dec 1866 and the birth registered (perfectly properly) a week or two later, as happened with my great grandmother. And it's certainly possible that the birth was earlier still and registered late -- just because (in the UK) there was a legal requirement to register births within 42 days doesn't mean it necessarily always happened like that. But I'm now thinking that I should consider 'birth registration' to be a separate event to 'birth', much as I consider 'baptism' to be separate to 'birth'. I can then say, quite correctly, that the birth registration occurred in Jan-Mar 1867, and I can use this to estimate a birth in Nov 1866 - Mar 1867. This also allows the 'birth registration' event to have different participants to the 'birth' event. For example, a birth registration (in the UK, at least) has an informant who is often but not always a parent. However, I'm surprised that (so far as I can tell) none of the usual genealogical data models seem to allow for this. So how do other people record civil registrations? Or am I unusual in having quite a few people in my tree (generally cousins N-times removed) where the registration quarter is my best estimate of their date of birth or death? Richard

On 2013-01-27, singhals <singhals@erols.com> wrote: > Does anyone have a spare power brick for a Proxima A502C LCD > projection panel lying around unused and unloved? > > My power brick died and I can't find replacements on-line. > This series doesn't work on newer computers as the screen > res for the panel is so low most modern computers won't go > down that far. I happen to have two old laptops that still > work and happily work with the panel at seminars, workshops, > and other fun events. > > If you've got one, I'm interested in your terms -- OFF LIST > please. > > Cheryl A check of Ebay shows a whole panel non-working for $35+15 and a few others that claim to be working for around $75+shipping. The latter appear to include the power supply. If that's within your budget, one option would be to ask the non-working seller whether it includes the power supply or to buy a panel and power supply. There's a power adapter for $76, but that's a bad deal relative to a complete package for a dollar less. There was a good deal on a power supply, $10+7: http://www.ebay.com/itm/PROXIMA-COLORWORKS-POWER-ADAPTER-MODEL-UP30432-comes-w-power-cord-/170975604690?pt=Multipurpose_AC_to_DC_Adapters&hash=item27cef0afd2 One ebay image shows the power supply as a Model No. UP30432, P/N #400-00018. There are other power supplies online for sale; for example: http://www.kpsurplus.com/buy/power_supply_up30432_5vdc_3_0a_5vdc_300ma_12vdc_2a/58824 Another Ebay image shows the power specs on the panel as +5VCDC/3A, +12VDC/2A, -5VDC/0.3A. Pretty much any PC power supply can feed that current at those voltages, and cobbling together an adapter between the connectors wouldn't be rocket surgery. 1/2 :-) The pinouts are here: http://myplace.frontier.com/~yub_yump/Pinout%20pin%20outs%20power%20supply.htm Here's a page with a write-up on using an AT power supply for a similar projector. I didn't compare the pinouts, but it's very likely they are the same. Even if the exact pinouts differ, the concept is the same. A more modern ATX power supply should work, too, with adaptation in pinouts. http://www.realm-online.com/eovation.htm The connector on the projector appears to be a DIN-5, which should be available at any good electronics house--and maybe, just maybe, at Radio Shack. I probably have one if you can't find one and want to go that route. HTH -- Robert Riches spamtrap42@jacob21819.net (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

singhals wrote: > Does anyone have a spare power brick for a Proxima A502C LCD projection > panel lying around unused and unloved? > > My power brick died and I can't find replacements on-line. This series > doesn't work on newer computers as the screen res for the panel is so > low most modern computers won't go down that far. I happen to have two > old laptops that still work and happily work with the panel at seminars, > workshops, and other fun events. > > If you've got one, I'm interested in your terms -- OFF LIST please. Have you seen this? http://www.ebay.com/itm/ITE-UP30432-Generic-AC-Power-Supply-Adapter-for-Proxima-/221048572362?pt=UK_Computing_LaptopAccessories_PowerSupplies&hash=item33778589ca The complication is, it's on this side of the pond, an unusual reversal. -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk