Charlie Hoffpauir wrote: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:33:10 -0500, singhals<singhals@erols.com> > wrote: > >> Charlie Hoffpauir wrote: >>> On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 20:07:06 -0500, singhals<singhals@erols.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> <snip> >>>> I'm gonna take your word for it that when you export you get >>>> a "NICK" field. I can't make Legacy or RM put that field >>>> into the GED. I generated an RM GED (it didn't give me any >>>> options about my target), and 4 from Legacy. None of them >>>> had "NICK" when I looked. >>>> >>>>> If RM had the same Family Navigation Screen as Legacy I would switch >>>>> back. But I'm a creature of habit. Where is that Fountain of Youth? >>>> >>>> Just past the Free Lunch Counter. ;) >>>> >>>> Cheryl >>> >>> I tested this on the free version I downloaded, and if I put a given >>> name within quote marks, it is indeed put into a field labeled "NICK". >>> I found nothing in any Legacy documentation referring to this, but a >>> response posted in a Legacy user group indicated that this was the >>> practice. BTW, it also shows the name with quote marks in the NAME >>> field. Example below: >>> >>> 0 HEAD >>> 1 SOUR Legacy >>> 2 VERS 7.5 >>> 2 NAME Legacy (R) >>> 2 CORP Millennia Corp. >>> 3 ADDR PO Box 9410 >>> 4 CONT Surprise, AZ 85374 >>> 1 DEST Legacy >>> 1 DATE 27 Feb 2013 >>> 1 SUBM @S0@ >>> 1 FILE G:\RootsMagic\GEDCOMS\Example.ged >>> 1 GEDC >>> 2 VERS 5.5.1 >>> 2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED >>> 1 CHAR ANSEL >>> 0 @S0@ SUBM >>> 1 NAME Not Given >>> 0 @I31540@ INDI >>> 1 NAME Charles Richard "Dicky" /Hoffpauir/ >>> 2 GIVN Charles Richard "Dicky" >>> 2 SURN Hoffpauir >>> 2 NICK Dicky >>> 1 SEX M >>> 1 BIRT >>> 2 DATE 15 Oct 1939 >>> 1 _UID DC7C5732B78C4F388EBFC9274C420EE1650B >>> 1 CHAN >>> 2 DATE 27 Feb 2013 >>> 3 TIME 08:36 >>> 0 @I31541@ INDI >>> 1 NAME Jerry 'Lynn' /Hoffpauir/ >>> 2 GIVN Jerry 'Lynn' >>> 2 SURN Hoffpauir >>> 1 SEX M >>> 1 _UID F025847F04784538B6E815A6089FC80DE636 >>> 1 CHAN >>> 2 DATE 24 Feb 2013 >>> 3 TIME 09:13 >>> 0 @I31542@ INDI >>> 1 NAME Luther "Francis" /Hoffpauir/ >>> 2 GIVN Luther "Francis" >>> 2 SURN Hoffpauir >>> 2 NICK Francis >>> 1 SEX M >>> 1 _UID 1082D24D2C144E60A966605DCEB75FBB0A54 >>> 1 CHAN >>> 2 DATE 24 Feb 2013 >>> 3 TIME 09:13 >>> 0 TRLR >> >> >> Using a db I had handy at the FHC and Legacy7.5, I added >> "Tom" and (Tom) as an Alternate name to one Thomas >> Swearingen, and then created 4 GEDs: Legacy-to-Legacy; >> Legacy-to-GED5.5.1; Legacy-to-basic-GED; and Legacy-to-PAF5 >> Omitted from this is the Legacy to Basic GED one. >> > > Just wondering, why as an alternate name? What Hugh is looking at is > typically someone with the given names Luther Francis, who is called > Francis, and so usually signs L. Francis. Hugh wants to make it clear > that the program and anyone looking at it knows that person should be > known as Francis, rather than Luther, and so enters the name as Luther > "Francis". there's no need to use the alternate name field at all. Operating hypothesis was that if the GED was going to show NICK it would come from a field identified that way. Alt-Name was the nearest option. And, that's what it /sounded/ as if the HELP files were saying to do. OTOH, perhaps I was meant to understand that alt-name is where a woman's married name is to go. >> Out of Legacy TO Legacy: >> 0 HEAD >> 1 SOUR Legacy >> 2 VERS 7.5 >> 2 NAME Legacy (R) >> 2 CORP Millennia Corp. >> 3 ADDR PO Box 9410 >> 4 CONT Surprise, AZ 85374 >> 1 DEST Legacy >> 1 DATE 26 Feb 2013 >> 1 SUBM @S0@ >> 1 FILE E:\hhsbook\legacy.ged >> 1 GEDC >> 2 VERS 5.5.1 >> 2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED >> 1 CHAR ANSEL >> 0 @S0@ SUBM >> 1 NAME Not Given >> 0 @I1@ INDI >> 1 NAME Thomas /Swearingen/ >> 2 GIVN Thomas >> 2 SURN Swearingen >> 1 NAME "Tom" // >> 2 GIVN "Tom" >> 2 SURN >> 1 NAME (Tom) // >> 2 GIVN (Tom) >> 2 SURN >> 1 NAME 'Tom' // >> 2 GIVN 'Tom' >> 2 SURN >> 1 SEX M >> 1 BIRT >> 2 DATE 1688 >> 2 PLAC Md >> 2 SOUR @S2@ >> 1 DEAT Y >> 1 _UID BBE139991522481FAFC4589C6E7BE324631E >> 1 CHAN >> 2 DATE 26 Feb 2013 >> 3 TIME 13:36 >> 1 FAMS @F1@ >> >> **** >> Out of Legacy to GED 5.5.1; >> >> 0 HEAD >> 1 SOUR Legacy >> 2 VERS 7.5 >> 2 NAME Legacy (R) >> 2 CORP Millennia Corp. >> 3 ADDR PO Box 9410 >> 4 CONT Surprise, AZ 85374 >> 1 DEST Gedcom5.5.1 >> 1 DATE 26 Feb 2013 >> 1 SUBM @S0@ >> 1 FILE E:\hhsbook\5.5ged.ged >> 1 GEDC >> 2 VERS 5.5.1 >> 2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED >> 1 CHAR ANSEL >> 0 @S0@ SUBM >> 1 NAME Not Given >> 0 @I1@ INDI >> 1 NAME Thomas /Swearingen/ >> 2 GIVN Thomas >> 2 SURN Swearingen >> 1 NAME "Tom" // >> 2 GIVN "Tom" >> 2 SURN >> 1 NAME (Tom) // >> 2 GIVN (Tom) >> 2 SURN >> 1 NAME 'Tom' // >> 2 GIVN 'Tom' >> 2 SURN >> 1 SEX M >> 1 BIRT >> 2 DATE 1688 >> 2 PLAC Md >> 2 SOUR @S2@ >> 1 DEAT Y >> 1 _UID BBE139991522481FAFC4589C6E7BE324631E >> 1 CHAN >> 2 DATE 26 Feb 2013 >> 3 TIME 13:36 >> 1 FAMS @F1@ >> *** >> >> Out of Legacy to PAF 5.x: >> 0 HEAD >> 1 SOUR Legacy >> 2 VERS 7.5 >> 2 NAME Legacy (R) >> 2 CORP Millennia Corp. >> 3 ADDR PO Box 9410 >> 4 CONT Surprise, AZ 85374 >> 1 DEST PAF5 >> 1 DATE 26 Feb 2013 >> 1 SUBM @S0@ >> 1 FILE E:\hhsbook\paf5.ged >> 1 GEDC >> 2 VERS 5.5.1 >> 2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED >> 1 CHAR UTF-8 >> 0 @S0@ SUBM >> 1 NAME Not Given >> 0 @I1@ INDI >> 1 NAME Thomas /Swearingen/ >> 2 GIVN Thomas >> 2 SURN Swearingen >> 2 _AKA "Tom" // or (Tom) // or 'Tom' // >> 1 SEX M >> 1 BIRT >> 2 DATE 1688 >> 2 PLAC Md >> 2 SOUR @S2@ >> 1 DEAT Y >> 1 _UID BBE139991522481FAFC4589C6E7BE324631E >> 1 CHAN >> 2 DATE 26 Feb 2013 >> 3 TIME 13:36 >> 1 FAMS @F1@ >> 0 @I2@ INDI >> 1 NAME Lydia /Riley/ >> 2 GIVN Lydia >> 2 SURN Riley >> 2 SOUR @S34@ >> 1 SEX F >> 1 BIRT >> 2 DATE 1691 >> 2 SOUR @S2@ >> 1 DEAT >> 2 DATE 1764 >> 1 _UID C6E486BFCC2A4B16A1481566C65678609EBB >> 1 CHAN >> 2 DATE 5 Feb 2013 >> 3 TIME 13:49 >> 1 FAMS @F1@ >> >> I then opened the same file with RM. So far as I could >> determine, the RM version available at the Family History >> Centers *has* no options, you either export a .ged or you >> don't -- I didn't even see a way to restrict how much of the >> file I wanted exported; probably a user-error there. >> > > Bruce has in the past said somthing to the effect that RM strickly > adhears to the GEDCOM spec.... so I guess that means that there ARE no > options. Like Legacy, after you decide to export a GEDOM you can (by > default) export the entire database, or in RM select from a list.... > where there are many options. It's hard to see how anything can actually adhere to the spec, because it several places it contradicts itself, but OK; still, I'd think it would let me SAY whether I wished to include ALL spouses or only direct-line ancestors. I did managed to pick a few to export, but for something larger than a 5-man sample, way too much manual effort. >> However, RM to Ged: >> 0 HEAD >> 1 SOUR RootsMagic >> 2 NAME RootsMagic >> 2 VERS 6.0 >> 2 CORP RootsMagic, Inc. >> 3 ADDR PO Box 495 >> 4 CONT Springville, UT 84663 >> 4 CONT USA >> 3 PHON 1-800-ROOTSMAGIC >> 3 WWW www.RootsMagic.com >> 1 DEST RootsMagic >> 1 DATE 26 FEB 2013 >> 1 FILE RM_.ged >> 1 GEDC >> 2 VERS 5.5.1 >> 2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED >> 1 CHAR UTF-8 >> 0 @I1@ INDI >> 1 NAME Thomas /Swearingen/ >> 2 GIVN Thomas >> 2 SURN Swearingen >> 1 NAME "Tom" // >> 2 GIVN "Tom" >> 1 NAME (Tom) // >> 2 GIVN (Tom) >> 1 NAME 'Tom' // >> 2 GIVN 'Tom' >> 1 SEX M >> 1 _UID CD0DA454E12248949954482C7D550E6A5CEE >> 1 CHAN >> 2 DATE 26 FEB 2013 >> 1 BIRT >> 2 _PRIM Y >> 2 DATE 1688 >> 2 PLAC Md >> 2 SOUR @S2@ >> 3 _TMPLT >> 4 FIELD >> 5 NAME Page >> 1 DEAT Y >> 1 FAMS @F1@ >> >> *** >> >> No NICK in sight. >> >> [shrug] As my mechanic often says, if I can't replicate it, >> I can't fix it. (g) >> >> Still -- Hugh -- If you haven't already, does Legacy let you >> do case-sensitive? If so then pick that and do a Find: "H >> Replace: (H and then a FIND: h" Replace: h) >> >> Cheryl > > > I don't know enough about Legacy to test various types of GEDCOMS, I > just went with the default, and as the responder on the Legacy user > group advised, putting a name within quotes gave me the NICK in the > export. Apparently this is what Hugh is getting also. > > As to the last comment, the point is that "Hugh" is just an example. > In reality, the name to be altered from "Hugh" to (Hugh) is really > "any" name. > True enough, but what you want to find doesn't matter to the technique? C