I think the answer is no. What I would do it convert it to a graphic. Even if you put it up on the screen and do a screen capture, open a graphic program and paste. Then save it as a JPG. Alan Jones Mission Viejo, Calif. -----Original Message----- From: Melanie Petersen [mailto:melaniepetersen23@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 5:51 AM To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [PAF-5] PDF Files in PAF Is there a way to attach PDF files in PAF? A lot of my census records are saved on my computer this way. I tried to attach the files, but PAF said it didn't recognize the file type. Thanks, Melanie ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service http://www.familysearch.org/

Hi Melanie, One work around is to open the pdf's and export them as jpg files in Adobe Acrobat. You need the full program for that. If you have any further questions I'd be happy to help. Cheers, Charleen (PS: Do I know you?) ---------------------------------------- From: "Melanie Petersen" <melaniepetersen23@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 6:00 AM To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: SPAM-LOW: [PAF-5] PDF Files in PAF Is there a way to attach PDF files in PAF? A lot of my census records are saved on my computer this way. I tried to attach the files, but PAF said it didn't recognize the file type. Thanks, Melanie ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service http://www.familysearch.org/

Is there a way to attach PDF files in PAF? A lot of my census records are saved on my computer this way. I tried to attach the files, but PAF said it didn't recognize the file type. Thanks, Melanie

Hi Larry, Interesting problem - what you seem to want to do is to identify those events that have a date but no associated source citation. There may be a smarter way to do this - but how about the following: For the filter conditions, select "Birth Date" exists AND ("Source" title equals xxxxxxx OR "source" title equals yyyyyyyy OR "source" title equals zzzzzzzz) Where x, y and z (etc.) are the source titles you have that cover the different sources that you have for a birth entry. This will produce a list of individuals who have a birth date and have a source associated with a birth entry - output the report to a Comma Delimited (.txt) file and then open in an Excel spreadsheet. Then do a similar report but defining the filter to only look for those with a birth date that exists. Output the report to a Comma Delimited File and again, open as an excel spreadsheet. You can now copy and paste these two reports/excel spreadsheet together to do a line by line match to highlight those that are in the second list but not in the first (those with a birth date but no associated birth source) Easier to do than describe - but I would be interested if anyone has a better solution. Regards, Stewart -----Original Message----- From: Larry Simonsen [mailto:jlsimonsen@comcast.net] Sent: 08 July 2005 13:18 To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [PAF-5] finding research to be done. I am trying to define a field filter. the filter would be for those individuals where I have a event date but no citation for that date. the event could be a birth date, death date, etc. the source part of the filter does not seem to have the ability to focus on the event but is general to all events. just wanting to verify that I have this right or if there is another way to do this kind of a filter. Larry Simonsen ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== AVG Anti-Virus Users Disable the 'Certify outgoing messages' option via the E-mail Scanner tab.

Joe, Two comments. You might be more comfortable with FTM doing your split since you know how that program works. On the other hand, if you need to learn PAF, there is no better way than using it to split your data and find all the features that PAF has for the operation. If you are going to have several data bases and make changes in each and expect to combine them later, PAF is the only way to go, with its Unique identifiers. Walt ----- Original Message ----- From: "thehornguy" <thehornguy@bellsouth.net> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Dividing my PAF Files > > Hello, Walt an others!! > > I very much appreciate your comments in the message with that subject line > shown above!! > > One of my own 'stumbling places' (after I had got a considerable amount of > data already in-put) with FTW was that I later decided I wanted to operate > with at least four data-base groups, as one person suggested, with my four > sets of GP couples. > > Now, I have also decided to take the FTW GEDCOM (In separate parts, if > possible) and transfer them into the PAF 5.2, one of the four GP couples > (plus the data for their ancestor group) at a time. > > I have not become very familiar with the PAF in-putting process, yet, so > there is still a good bit of 'learning curve' for me to get through. > > Is it better to do the GEDCOM, import it, and then split it into four > separate data-bases, or to split them into four before making the GEDCOM > files for transport?? Or, perhaps, the real question is, at which point > in the import process do (should) I make the four data-bases separate?? > And will that be easy to work with, or not, in the PAF system?? > > I appreciate all this chatting about the PAF, and am saving the entries > which seem to be most useful for me, so that I can go back and look them > over, as I go along. > > Thanks for your comments below, and before, and also now!! > > Joe DUKE > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <PAF-5-USERS-D-request@rootsweb.com> > To: <PAF-5-USERS-D@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 7:04 AM > Subject: PAF-5-USERS-D Digest V05 #134 > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service > http://www.familysearch.org/ > >

Hi Joe -- & others on this topic, I don't wish to unnecessarily upset people - and I have hesitated about voicing my opinion on this - but as I've watched comments on this topic of managing multiple data bases and being a PAF user since the beginning I have tried to think of any advantages to this process. And I can think of none - even after watching the previous posts. Just why anyone would wish to do this is beyond me. It can only breed problems --- exactly how your single data base is split --- how on earth you manage to recombine it to pass on to your children --- how you deal with any ancestral lines that occur in multiple databases -- the duplication of data/sources between the generations where the split occurs --- never being able to do a complete ancestral or descendancy analysis --- and what if your children want to follow your example and have 4 databases based on their grandparents, which of course are your parents - the merging and de-merging is enough to give anyone a permanent headache. My unreserved recommendation is - don't do it. Keep a single database for your family - you, your spouse and your children. When your children (eventually) move on with their spouse and want to inherit the family database - simply (!) merge yours and their spouses together. The old IT slogan of KISS has a lot going for it. Good luck, Stewart -----Original Message----- From: thehornguy [mailto:thehornguy@bellsouth.net] Sent: 08 July 2005 14:57 To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Dividing my PAF Files Hello, Walt an others!! I very much appreciate your comments in the message with that subject line shown above!! One of my own 'stumbling places' (after I had got a considerable amount of data already in-put) with FTW was that I later decided I wanted to operate with at least four data-base groups, as one person suggested, with my four sets of GP couples. Now, I have also decided to take the FTW GEDCOM (In separate parts, if possible) and transfer them into the PAF 5.2, one of the four GP couples (plus the data for their ancestor group) at a time. I have not become very familiar with the PAF in-putting process, yet, so there is still a good bit of 'learning curve' for me to get through. Is it better to do the GEDCOM, import it, and then split it into four separate data-bases, or to split them into four before making the GEDCOM files for transport?? Or, perhaps, the real question is, at which point in the import process do (should) I make the four data-bases separate?? And will that be easy to work with, or not, in the PAF system?? I appreciate all this chatting about the PAF, and am saving the entries which seem to be most useful for me, so that I can go back and look them over, as I go along. Thanks for your comments below, and before, and also now!! Joe DUKE ----- Original Message ----- From: <PAF-5-USERS-D-request@rootsweb.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-D@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 7:04 AM Subject: PAF-5-USERS-D Digest V05 #134 ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service http://www.familysearch.org/

Stewart I would agree with you for normal use of all of your personal family, except when maintaing a ONS (One Name Study). In my case I have all of my personal family on one database consisting of over 8000 records. But since I maintain a COTTON ONS for the entire world I have at least 10 other databases with some 40,000 records, divided up by geographical areas. Ross GH Cotton, Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 Genealogy of the COTTON surname is my Enigma. I haven't sent an attachment if the details are not mentioned above. Check out my Genealogy Web Page at www.skylinc.net/~rgcotton GOONS member responsible for tracking the family name COTTON, #1437 Coordinator for Cotton DNA testing Project, Worldwide ----- Original Message ----- From: Stewart Millar To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 11:19 AM Subject: RE: [PAF-5] Dividing my PAF Files Hi Joe -- & others on this topic, I don't wish to unnecessarily upset people - and I have hesitated about voicing my opinion on this - but as I've watched comments on this topic of managing multiple data bases and being a PAF user since the beginning I have tried to think of any advantages to this process. And I can think of none - even after watching the previous posts. Just why anyone would wish to do this is beyond me. It can only breed problems --- exactly how your single data base is split --- how on earth you manage to recombine it to pass on to your children --- how you deal with any ancestral lines that occur in multiple databases -- the duplication of data/sources between the generations where the split occurs --- never being able to do a complete ancestral or descendancy analysis --- and what if your children want to follow your example and have 4 databases based on their grandparents, which of course are your parents - the merging and de-merging is enough to give anyone a permanent headache. My unreserved recommendation is - don't do it. Keep a single database for your family - you, your spouse and your children. When your children (eventually) move on with their spouse and want to inherit the family database - simply (!) merge yours and their spouses together. The old IT slogan of KISS has a lot going for it. Good luck, Stewart -----Original Message----- From: thehornguy [mailto:thehornguy@bellsouth.net] Sent: 08 July 2005 14:57 To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [PAF-5] Dividing my PAF Files Hello, Walt an others!! I very much appreciate your comments in the message with that subject line shown above!! One of my own 'stumbling places' (after I had got a considerable amount of data already in-put) with FTW was that I later decided I wanted to operate with at least four data-base groups, as one person suggested, with my four sets of GP couples. Now, I have also decided to take the FTW GEDCOM (In separate parts, if possible) and transfer them into the PAF 5.2, one of the four GP couples (plus the data for their ancestor group) at a time. I have not become very familiar with the PAF in-putting process, yet, so there is still a good bit of 'learning curve' for me to get through. Is it better to do the GEDCOM, import it, and then split it into four separate data-bases, or to split them into four before making the GEDCOM files for transport?? Or, perhaps, the real question is, at which point in the import process do (should) I make the four data-bases separate?? And will that be easy to work with, or not, in the PAF system?? I appreciate all this chatting about the PAF, and am saving the entries which seem to be most useful for me, so that I can go back and look them over, as I go along. Thanks for your comments below, and before, and also now!! Joe DUKE ----- Original Message ----- From: <PAF-5-USERS-D-request@rootsweb.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-D@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 7:04 AM Subject: PAF-5-USERS-D Digest V05 #134 ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service http://www.familysearch.org/ ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service http://www.familysearch.org/

Hello, Walt an others!! I very much appreciate your comments in the message with that subject line shown above!! One of my own 'stumbling places' (after I had got a considerable amount of data already in-put) with FTW was that I later decided I wanted to operate with at least four data-base groups, as one person suggested, with my four sets of GP couples. Now, I have also decided to take the FTW GEDCOM (In separate parts, if possible) and transfer them into the PAF 5.2, one of the four GP couples (plus the data for their ancestor group) at a time. I have not become very familiar with the PAF in-putting process, yet, so there is still a good bit of 'learning curve' for me to get through. Is it better to do the GEDCOM, import it, and then split it into four separate data-bases, or to split them into four before making the GEDCOM files for transport?? Or, perhaps, the real question is, at which point in the import process do (should) I make the four data-bases separate?? And will that be easy to work with, or not, in the PAF system?? I appreciate all this chatting about the PAF, and am saving the entries which seem to be most useful for me, so that I can go back and look them over, as I go along. Thanks for your comments below, and before, and also now!! Joe DUKE ----- Original Message ----- From: <PAF-5-USERS-D-request@rootsweb.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-D@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 7:04 AM Subject: PAF-5-USERS-D Digest V05 #134

I am trying to define a field filter. the filter would be for those individuals where I have a event date but no citation for that date. the event could be a birth date, death date, etc. the source part of the filter does not seem to have the ability to focus on the event but is general to all events. just wanting to verify that I have this right or if there is another way to do this kind of a filter. Larry Simonsen

First you need a place to upload your information, it cannot just go to the Internet in general. Many times the ISP you use allocates some web space for you, and there are other free (usually with advertising) and paid web hosting services. If your ISP does not provide web space, one you might consider is http://geocities.yahoo.com/ . The web host will have specific information on how to upload the web pages to their service, which often involves using an FTP program. Along with the basic web pages, there are some complicating factors in terms of the folder structure if you want to include photos or other multimedia. If you are not familiar with FTP software, the specifics of how to upload the files may be a bit complex to work through over email. Gary Templeman -------------- Original message -------------- > Hi everyone: > > I just recently figured out how to do a webpage and show ALL my ancestors. I > now would like to submit my WEBPAGE on the Internet. > > Please tell me HOW TO DO IT. > > Thank you very much. > > Lucie Servole Myers > > > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/~garres-1694 > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/~garcia-1698 > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/~1706 > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/~1744 > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > AVG Anti-Virus Users > Disable the 'Certify outgoing messages' option via the E-mail Scanner tab. >

Bette, If you start with your data in PAF 5.0, each person you have in your file will have a unique identifier, the UIC. As you and your husband, using PAF, work on files derived from the original PAF data and are careful not to delete or combine or merge away the original "person" when it comes time to combine your files again you can merge and identify the "duplicates" by their identical UIC numbers. One of the options in match/merge is to look for identical UICs. Don't lose hope about merging. The UIC was created to make it easier to merge back split data bases. If the persons have not been changed you can let the system merge them automatically. If there are differences, you can then decide how to combine the differing data. I use this feature when I split a small part of my data base to work on it. When I am finished, I then use this feature to combine my data back into my main data base. Works like a charm. :-) Walt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bette" <nobia@centurytel.net> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 11:40 AM Subject: [PAF-5] Dividing my PAF Files > Thank you all for your help. You have given me a lot to think about. > I have been updating and making correction in our PAF. My husband and I > have our own computers; I thought it would be faster if we both work on > our own surnames. > > After I accomplish this (if I do), his "Kushner" line would be updated and > so would my file but not together. I really like easy, and I cannot see > how it would be easy to put our data back together. > > Thank you again so much for all your help. > > Bette > > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > AVG Anti-Virus Users > Disable the 'Certify outgoing messages' option via the E-mail Scanner tab. >

For the person who wanted web space to upload her family information, see: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/

Hi Tom, While the difficulty of spouses working on a combined file is a challenge, it is not nearly as difficult as the challenge that your children will have when they want to combine your file with your spouse's file and will have to deal with all the duplicates from crossed lines. The only way I can imagine that it would work is if you agree to not trace your separate lines back beyond a certain limit. My wife and I have so many lines that cross back in England that it would be a huge deterrent for my children to ever want to continue with the research if they had to combine them. Richard Rands At 10:11 AM 7/7/2005 -0600, Tom Sevy wrote: >I agree that spouses should not have combined files (unless, they happen >to be first cousins). However there are other reasons to divide PAF >files. I decided to divide my files by grandparents, which gives me four >PAF files: Seavey, Clark, Christensen and Dean. There is very little >overlap in these family lines (but there is some on the Seavey and Clark >lines which are both in New England, but didn't get together until about >1850 in Utah). I find that it is convenient to have them separate. > >I made a BIG mistake when I decided to divide my UTAH SEVEY file (which >had about 2000 names) from my Large SEAVEY file which has 28,000 names. >After seeing the problems of dividing the files, I recombined them and had >a fair amount of trouble getting rid of duplicates. Using PAF Insight >helped me get rid of many duplicates because of the hidden identifier >number in PAF, but a lot I had to do with Match & Merge. I think I >finally have done it, but it took a lot of time. > >Tom Sevy in Taylorsville, Utah. > > >==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >PAF-5-USERS Mailing List >http://www.ausbdm.org/p5uindex.php

I agree that spouses should not have combined files (unless, they happen to be first cousins). However there are other reasons to divide PAF files. I decided to divide my files by grandparents, which gives me four PAF files: Seavey, Clark, Christensen and Dean. There is very little overlap in these family lines (but there is some on the Seavey and Clark lines which are both in New England, but didn't get together until about 1850 in Utah). I find that it is convenient to have them separate. I made a BIG mistake when I decided to divide my UTAH SEVEY file (which had about 2000 names) from my Large SEAVEY file which has 28,000 names. After seeing the problems of dividing the files, I recombined them and had a fair amount of trouble getting rid of duplicates. Using PAF Insight helped me get rid of many duplicates because of the hidden identifier number in PAF, but a lot I had to do with Match & Merge. I think I finally have done it, but it took a lot of time. Tom Sevy in Taylorsville, Utah.

Thank you all for your help. You have given me a lot to think about. I have been updating and making correction in our PAF. My husband and I have our own computers; I thought it would be faster if we both work on our own surnames. After I accomplish this (if I do), his "Kushner" line would be updated and so would my file but not together. I really like easy, and I cannot see how it would be easy to put our data back together. Thank you again so much for all your help. Bette

Hi everyone: I just recently figured out how to do a webpage and show ALL my ancestors. I now would like to submit my WEBPAGE on the Internet. Please tell me HOW TO DO IT. Thank you very much. Lucie Servole Myers http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/~garres-1694 http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/~garcia-1698 http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/~1706 http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/~1744 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

If you have a date for an adoption, use the Named event with a date and explanation. You can also use the Also Known As field. You will need to pick one name for the person's 'actual entry' Regina Barry * rmbarry1066@earthlink.net * http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rbarry4145/index.htm Affairs are easier of entrance than of exit; and it is but common prudence to see our way out before we venture in. Aesop

I don't have PAF Companion in front of me, but my guess is that it just remembers the last file it used. You would need to launch Companion, then go to File_Open and select the new one. (You might need to close the original one first). I think you can also get to Companion through the Tools menu in PAF, in which case, if you new file is the active one Companion should use it automatically. Gary Templeman -------------- Original message -------------- > Instead of trying to match and merge I opened a new file and started to add my > genealogy again. I am using the export/import feature. Slow going but not too > bad. My problem is how do I get a companion to show up for the new file. When I > open companion it shows only the original file with all the names and not the > new one with the few names I had added. I hope someone can understand what I am > trying to ask.I am using 5.2. I appreciate all the help and advice you have > given me so far. thanks!! Teddy > > > --------------------------------- > Sell on Yahoo! Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items. > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > FreeBMD - Free Access to England and Wales Civil Registration Index > Volunteer as a Transcriber Today! > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ >

I think I have to disagree on this one. What about a married woman? When she marries she legally changes her name but you wouldn't change it in PAF. I would be inclined to enter First name (Birth name) New name. Rollei (in Australia) >From: "Alan Jones at home" <alanjones10@cox.net> >To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: RE: [PAF-5] Change in adoption names >Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 16:30:11 -0700 > >I use a person's legal name. So if they legally changed it, that is what >I use. Of course I explain it all in the notes and I even use the Also >Known As / Other names field to put in the name at birth. >When you see the biological father, it is accurate that that child has a >different name because they legally changed it. Even if they were not >adopted, if the child legally changed their name it should recorded that >way in their family tree. > > > >Alan Jones >Mission Viejo, Calif. > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: richcar@cfl.rr.com [mailto:richcar@cfl.rr.com] >Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 4:07 PM >To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: [PAF-5] Change in adoption names > > >Hope someone can help us with this. Here is the problem: It involves >birth names and adoption. >When we enter the original birth name with the biological father it is >fine. But >then the child was adopted by her stepfather and while in court her >entire >name was changed. The program will list one man as biological and one >as >adopted. However, we cannot find a way to reflect the change in name. >If >we make the adopted parent primary and use the new name, then the name >with >the birth father is wrong. If we use the name at birth, it does not >change >with the addition of the adoption. The problem then becomes when she >marries it uses her birth name and she has not used that name in many >years. >We have changed the names around, changed who is primary, we are going >in >circles and cannot arrive at a birth name, and the adopted name. We are >using 5.0. Can anyone > .help?????? Thank you, C Fancher Someone told me that there >hada been some emails on this >subject here, but I only just subscribesd so don't know how to go and >get back emails either. > > >==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >FreeBMD - Free Access to England and Wales Civil Registration Index >Volunteer as a Transcriber Today! http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > > > >==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >PAF @ FamilySearch Internet Genealogy Service >http://www.familysearch.org/eng/paf/ >

Instead of trying to match and merge I opened a new file and started to add my genealogy again. I am using the export/import feature. Slow going but not too bad. My problem is how do I get a companion to show up for the new file. When I open companion it shows only the original file with all the names and not the new one with the few names I had added. I hope someone can understand what I am trying to ask.I am using 5.2. I appreciate all the help and advice you have given me so far. thanks!! Teddy --------------------------------- Sell on Yahoo! Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items.