I absolutely LOVE what the RootsMagician has done with the sources and the new templates we have to use, so much so that I am converting a selected number of older ones into new ones to take advantage of what we have now. Unfortunately, unless I am missing something, in order to do this I have to: 1. Create a new companion source 2. Print out a listing of the old source list with citations 3. Enter the NEW source and citation (if there is one) ONE FACT AT A TIME, until I get to the end of the printed list. For sources with few citations, this is not a terribly long process, but in a few cases I have DOZENS if not HUNDREDS of citations, each one of which must be moved one at a time, and for this reason I have yet to even think about some of my sources with a lot of citations. Is there a better way of doing this? I can create a new source, then merge the old one into the new one, but that does not take the citations with it and leave them in the correct place in the NEW source. Am I missing something in this process? Can I merge an old source into a freshly-created new one in such a way that the citations are moved as well and remain as entered in the correct fact? I know the sources themselves will do this, which means sources WITHOUT citations will merge to the new source without problem, but not source citations. I have done this with many of my sources so far, mostly those without citations or very few citations, but I really do not relish the thought of merging some of my larger sources this way and moving citations ONE FACT AT A TIME this way. If anyone out there has any suggestions, I would sure love to hear from you and thank you in advance. David E. Cann decann@infionline.net or "david.e.cann" on Skype

David I have been slowly doing this also. I have done them the same way up to having a list from the old Source list saving in a rtf format. Then merging them & keeping the old list for backup. Reason I made a rtf format as I too noticed that items did not get in the same place. But a lot of mine with the Detail text filled in or if the info was in the notes then moved them to the Detail Text so that they can be printed once in an Narrative Report and not twice. also they were in the right slot, so was able to finish and fix up the rest of the new source template to fit. Yes takes time, but I like it. I have no plans to gedcom to someone that does not have RM. I even talked my cousin into buying it so we can share the database. Others think I am crazy for doing this. But again I am not planning on using the gedcom feature outside of RM. -----Original Message----- From: rootsmagic-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:rootsmagic-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of David E. Cann Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 10:50 AM To: RootsMagic Users List Posting Subject: [RMagic] New source templates vs. old I absolutely LOVE what the RootsMagician has done with the sources and the new templates we have to use, so much so that I am converting a selected number of older ones into new ones to take advantage of what we have now. Unfortunately, unless I am missing something, in order to do this I have to: 1. Create a new companion source 2. Print out a listing of the old source list with citations 3. Enter the NEW source and citation (if there is one) ONE FACT AT A TIME, until I get to the end of the printed list. For sources with few citations, this is not a terribly long process, but in a few cases I have DOZENS if not HUNDREDS of citations, each one of which must be moved one at a time, and for this reason I have yet to even think about some of my sources with a lot of citations. Is there a better way of doing this? I can create a new source, then merge the old one into the new one, but that does not take the citations with it and leave them in the correct place in the NEW source. Am I missing something in this process? Can I merge an old source into a freshly-created new one in such a way that the citations are moved as well and remain as entered in the correct fact? I know the sources themselves will do this, which means sources WITHOUT citations will merge to the new source without problem, but not source citations. I have done this with many of my sources so far, mostly those without citations or very few citations, but I really do not relish the thought of merging some of my larger sources this way and moving citations ONE FACT AT A TIME this way. If anyone out there has any suggestions, I would sure love to hear from you and thank you in advance. David E. Cann decann@infionline.net or "david.e.cann" on Skype =================================== RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTSMAGIC-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It is my impression that the citations stay put for the same person|family|event when their source is merged into another source. What I suspect you are seeing is the loss of information that occurs when you merge sources having differing source template. That is true also if Free Form is one of them. All the field names of the secondary source (meaning the one that will be merged) must exist in the same hierarchy in the destination of primary source, else their values will appear to be lost; i.e. master source fields must appear in the destination's master source spec and source details fields in the destination's source details spec. The data is not necessarily gone, though. By adding the secondary field names to the appropriate places in the primary source template sentence templates, I think they will be outputted. A long time ago (RM4 days), a source conversion utility was requested for mapping sources from one template to another. That's not simple, because of the hierarchical consideration, when converting between lumpy and splitty sources. It can be made to work for citations of finely split sources to lumped sources but not the other way round. Tom -----Original Message----- From: Genbits Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 2:42 PM To: rootsmagic-users@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [RMagic] New source templates vs. old David I have been slowly doing this also. I have done them the same way up to having a list from the old Source list saving in a rtf format. Then merging them & keeping the old list for backup. Reason I made a rtf format as I too noticed that items did not get in the same place. But a lot of mine with the Detail text filled in or if the info was in the notes then moved them to the Detail Text so that they can be printed once in an Narrative Report and not twice. also they were in the right slot, so was able to finish and fix up the rest of the new source template to fit. Yes takes time, but I like it. I have no plans to gedcom to someone that does not have RM. I even talked my cousin into buying it so we can share the database. Others think I am crazy for doing this. But again I am not planning on using the gedcom feature outside of RM. -----Original Message----- From: rootsmagic-users-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:rootsmagic-users-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of David E. Cann Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 10:50 AM To: RootsMagic Users List Posting Subject: [RMagic] New source templates vs. old I absolutely LOVE what the RootsMagician has done with the sources and the new templates we have to use, so much so that I am converting a selected number of older ones into new ones to take advantage of what we have now. Unfortunately, unless I am missing something, in order to do this I have to: 1. Create a new companion source 2. Print out a listing of the old source list with citations 3. Enter the NEW source and citation (if there is one) ONE FACT AT A TIME, until I get to the end of the printed list. For sources with few citations, this is not a terribly long process, but in a few cases I have DOZENS if not HUNDREDS of citations, each one of which must be moved one at a time, and for this reason I have yet to even think about some of my sources with a lot of citations. Is there a better way of doing this? I can create a new source, then merge the old one into the new one, but that does not take the citations with it and leave them in the correct place in the NEW source. Am I missing something in this process? Can I merge an old source into a freshly-created new one in such a way that the citations are moved as well and remain as entered in the correct fact? I know the sources themselves will do this, which means sources WITHOUT citations will merge to the new source without problem, but not source citations. I have done this with many of my sources so far, mostly those without citations or very few citations, but I really do not relish the thought of merging some of my larger sources this way and moving citations ONE FACT AT A TIME this way. If anyone out there has any suggestions, I would sure love to hear from you and thank you in advance. David E. Cann decann@infionline.net or "david.e.cann" on Skype =================================== RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTSMAGIC-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message =================================== RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTSMAGIC-USERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message