Dennis Lee Bieber observed: > It doesn't help that, around the time frame of Android 4.x, > the core system load changed to put the internal memory on > /mnt/sdcard > and any external SD card in a slot is now at > /mnt/ext_sdcard (or a variation thereof) Yes, but after a large "hue and cry" from Android users, Google just recently updated the Android operating system for the new version 5, code named Lollipop, and made the external SD card accessible again. I now can use the new version of ES File Explorer to fully access the external SD card on my Android phone. The external card root is now "/storage/extSdCard". I made a directory for my SS files named: /storage/extSdCard/Android/data/Genealogy The new version of FireFox reads these SS files from the external card without any difficulty, and I have a bookmark to the index main file. So we Android users are back in business with SS on external SD cards. Michael

Pauline, make sure you have a full back up. I remember when I installed v9 it still pointed to many TMG v8 folders for a while til I read something which warned about this. I had to copy the files into the v9 folders. I suggest you rename the folder and make sure everything works fine before you eliminate the folders... Jan Sent from my iPad > On Jun 15, 2015, at 9:36 PM, John Cardinal via <tmg@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Pauline, > > For any Windows program that won't uninstall, you can try this trick: > install the program in the same folder over where it is now, then uninstall > it. The install will supply the info that uninstaller needs to do the job. > > When you uninstall TMG, it does not remove certain data folders that are not > created by the installer but instead are created when you start TMG for the > first time after the initial install. If you think it is necessary to remove > those folders, you can see the instructions here: > > http://www.whollygenes.com/forums201/index.php?/topic/14634-re-installing-tm > g8/ > > Those instructions are for TMG v8, but they should be accurate for TMG v9, > too. > > John > > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG/ > Instructions on how to subscribe to TMG: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TMG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > .

First-again-many thanks to each of you who replied; your thoughts have been very helpful. I have carefully reviewed the competing published lineages and have concluded that although both make some good points, neither has emerged as the clear winner. Both cite numerous original documents, but unfortunately both suffer from gaps in documentation for key connections. All the publications date from the 1950s, and I don't believe any of this would pass muster in today's genealogical journals. A lot of the "evidence" rests on people's names being the same, and one author even says that the "long arm of coincidence" couldn't possibly be so long as to explain away his conclusions. Well, I'm not so sure. What I've therefore decided to do is to stay with the ancestors I've already entered for my problem ancestor, adding to each of his ancestors the same undated Note tag that states briefly that this undocumented lineage was inherited and is apparently based on such-and-such book, and that a competing lineage is described in such and such articles, copies of which will be found in my paper files. I'll probably be adding other tags for my own research findings for each person in the future. This way, all FGS, ID, and journal reports on gggg-grandfather John or any of his forebears can include the informative warning, and other researchers using my materials (assuming there every are any!) can get the details from my paper files. The warning note itself will be very obvious in the Details screen for each person. In short, I've elected not to enter, person by person, all the people in the more recently discovered lineage in a parallel work-around line, despite the interesting suggestions for ways to do that, because it would be a lot of very tedious work devoted to info I don't really believe is worth that much trouble. If someday I do see that the competing lineage has been proven correct after all, I'll just sigh, delete the wrong people, and enter the new ones. Cheers, Barbara

Toby, You'll probably have more luck on the SS-L mailing list; more SS users there. I don't have an Android device, but I found this advice after a Google search. "I am using the Galaxy Tab S 10.5 and for me "file://localhost/sdcard" works in the Chrome browser on Android that comes with this device. I thought that sdcard would refer to an external media device that you can plug in, but it turns out that the sdcard in this URI refers to the built-in memory of the device." I think Android devices suffer from there being multiple manufacturers and multiple versions of Android, so what works for one person may not work for another. Given the device mentioned in the solution is either the same as yours, or close, the tip above may work. It should show a list of files, and from there, you can navigate to the folder that holds your SS site files. That's a guess based on the quoted section above and some other comments I found via a Google search. John

I use the 'candidate' tag.  I have some puzzles in early common name ancestors.  Most of the details are secondary evidence, or worse (SWAG) - so I use the parent or parents that seem to have the best information at the time, and use others as (potential) candidate parent/s.  They all hang around together until I get better information...if.     Having 'everyone' right there, when some new bit of information is found, referring to the chronology may better define which of the potential people could be eliminated.   JoAnn

I am frustrated at my inability to transfer my SS folder to my new Samsung Galaxy S5. I've tried three different downloaded file transfer apps, none of which work. Once the folder is transferred, only only PDF files, if placed in the Documents folder are shown, OR only the jpg and gif files are shown if placed in the Pictures folder. If I look at the folder structure within, say Android File Transfer, I'll see the index.htm file, but I cannot seem to get it to display on the phone screen where I can click on it. I can't remember the name of the other one I downloaded. One issue I have is I'm running an older OS on my Mac, but I actually used my laptop with one of the apps and it didn't work either. I'm really stuck. Has anybody successfully done this on an android phone. You can reply to me in a private message so we won't hijack the board, but I'm really at my wit's end. Never had a problem getting SS onto my iPads, but no luck at all with android so far. Regards, Toby

Pauline - Also see the Microsoft fix for that problem here: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2564571 Virginia On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:44 PM, paulineb via <tmg@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Thanks John I'll certainly will give it a try. I'm getting rather desperate! > > Pauline > ---- John Cardinal via <tmg@rootsweb.com> wrote: >> Pauline, >> >> For any Windows program that won't uninstall, you can try this trick: >> install the program in the same folder over where it is now, then uninstall >> it. The install will supply the info that uninstaller needs to do the job. >> >> When you uninstall TMG, it does not remove certain data folders that are not >> created by the installer but instead are created when you start TMG for the >> first time after the initial install. If you think it is necessary to remove >> those folders, you can see the instructions here: >> >> http://www.whollygenes.com/forums201/index.php?/topic/14634-re-installing-tm >> g8/ >> >> Those instructions are for TMG v8, but they should be accurate for TMG v9, >> too. >> >> John >> >> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG/ >> Instructions on how to subscribe to TMG: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TMG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG/ > Instructions on how to subscribe to TMG: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TMG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks John I'll certainly will give it a try. I'm getting rather desperate! Pauline ---- John Cardinal via <tmg@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Pauline, > > For any Windows program that won't uninstall, you can try this trick: > install the program in the same folder over where it is now, then uninstall > it. The install will supply the info that uninstaller needs to do the job. > > When you uninstall TMG, it does not remove certain data folders that are not > created by the installer but instead are created when you start TMG for the > first time after the initial install. If you think it is necessary to remove > those folders, you can see the instructions here: > > http://www.whollygenes.com/forums201/index.php?/topic/14634-re-installing-tm > g8/ > > Those instructions are for TMG v8, but they should be accurate for TMG v9, > too. > > John > > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG/ > Instructions on how to subscribe to TMG: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TMG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Pauline, For any Windows program that won't uninstall, you can try this trick: install the program in the same folder over where it is now, then uninstall it. The install will supply the info that uninstaller needs to do the job. When you uninstall TMG, it does not remove certain data folders that are not created by the installer but instead are created when you start TMG for the first time after the initial install. If you think it is necessary to remove those folders, you can see the instructions here: http://www.whollygenes.com/forums201/index.php?/topic/14634-re-installing-tm g8/ Those instructions are for TMG v8, but they should be accurate for TMG v9, too. John

Pauline - Did you try setting the port for the WG PDF printer to NUL? The assigned port under Devices and Printers / Printer Properties for the driver must be NUL. It is a simple matter to tick the box for Nul to set the port. Virginia On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 6:34 PM, paulineb via <tmg@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Since I'm unable to print reports I need to uninstall TMGv9.05 and reinstall. I'm unable to do so. When trying > a popup tells me: > > "Error opening installation log file. Verify that the specific log loction exists and is writable." > > I have no idea what this means. Today I had a computer repair man here and he couldn't uninstall the program > either. I'm certainly not ready to find another program so hopefully someone can help! > > Pau;ine B. > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG/ > Instructions on how to subscribe to TMG: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TMG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks Terry and Lee for your further comments. I have decided that it is fortunate that, of all those tags that have an age-related function in them, I have only used this particular tag witness sentence once so far! So, luckily, my problems are tightly circumscribed. In the meantime, in limiting the number of people in my Second Site project, I have managed to kill off all my exhibit galleries! I seem to be making troubles for myself! Thanks for everyone's help Nick

Since I'm unable to print reports I need to uninstall TMGv9.05 and reinstall. I'm unable to do so. When trying a popup tells me: "Error opening installation log file. Verify that the specific log loction exists and is writable." I have no idea what this means. Today I had a computer repair man here and he couldn't uninstall the program either. I'm certainly not ready to find another program so hopefully someone can help! Pau;ine B.

Hi Rick, OK - you are using the UK marriage (double line) parent link option. Switch to the US marriage link style. Many of these problems will go away. Robin On 15/06/2015 1:16 PM, Rick Van Dusen via wrote: > Robin, I'm not finding any unknown people. (I believe all unknowns are > entered as person with given and/or surnames of "(--?--)".) > > The spaces are seemingly random, appear to be making it so that the > parents are centered over the children or some such. In one case, there > is one person some 10m to the right of the nearest other people, and > those other people are several meters farther right than they need to be. > > I was hoping there might be an alternative to manually editing, which is > proving both a drudge and going to require that I learn more about > moving boxes and connecting lines. > > Thanks, Robin and Virginia. Unfortunately, I'm not going to get this > fixed for this reunion. Too much "life happening" right now. > > > Rick Van Dusen > > > > > > > On 6/12/2015 2:19 PM, robin lamacraft wrote: >> Hi Rick, >> >> Are you talking about occasional large gaps? >> Are these associated with "unknown person" boxes being placed an excess >> distance to the right? >> If so, identify the associated descendant and and deliberately add a new >> person, name "unknown person" for each case. >> [The VCF layout algorithm acts differently for a known ID person >> compared to one that it has create itself.] >> Now generate the chart again. >> >> If the chart is very wide and shallow look at the technique I described >> on page 243 of "Getting the Most Out of The Master Genealogist". This >> involves some post-generation editing. Typically this technique can >> reduce the width down to 35-50% of the original generated with by >> increasing the depth of the chart. >> >> Robin >> >> On 12/06/2015 8:56 PM, Rick Van Dusen via wrote: >>> I've printed Descendant Box Charts for my family, but find they come out >>> way too wide. Is there a way of: >>> >>> 1. Causing VCF to reduce the horizontal distances between boxes (in one >>> case I have one person hanging 10m out from the next "outlier"), >>> >>> and/or >>> >>> 2. Reducing the overall size of the chart ("zoom", but actually changing >>> the print size)? >>> >>> >>> Rick Van Dusen >>> The TMG archive is found here: >>> http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG/ >>> Instructions on how to subscribe to TMG: >>> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> TMG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG/ > Instructions on how to subscribe to TMG: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TMG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- Robin Lamacraft, Adelaide, Australia

Thanks so much to everyone for quite a feast of suggestions to explore, and so quickly! I knew I'd get some good ideas from you. Once I've worked out what I want to do, I'll describe it in enough detail to (I hope) make it useful to others. First, though, I need to wade back through the published sources to get a good handle on where I think the weak and strong links are in each of the two lineages being argued as being The Truth. Before I wade in too far, I need to be certain that one of the two doesn't emerge as an obvious winner-in which case, my problem would be largely solved. Upward and onward! Bobbie

I'm a bit late in adding my two bits (getting ready for the Gulf storm), but I've run into this occasionally. First, I would remove the controversial ancestor from my line (cutting his links to his parents, wife and children, but leaving him in my database), retaining all Tags relating to him. I then would enter the newly-acquired information for a duplicate individual, connecting him to your ancestry, using the lineage as explained in the two publications because it seems more authoritative. Finally, I would have a Note Tag (I don't use Anecdote Tag) at the very beginning which outputs prior to the date of birth explaining the controversy over the lineage. I would keep the former ggg within your project, entering a duplicate Note Tag for him containing the same explanation. I would make certain that all ancestral linkages are connected to my newly-entered ancestor. This way, if, in the future DNA are run which prove the earlier ggg (it would probably take multiple Y-DNA and autosomal tests for this to meet the GSP), I could switch out the two men, substituting your earlier man in place of the more-recently entered man's connections to parents, wife and children. It will take a bit of time to connect the wife and all the children of the original ggg to the new man, but TMG makes this relatively easy (for his children, click on the father of each child in Person View replacing him with the newly-entered man, etc.). I once had a similar problem - family books (not footnoted) which I'd first used had it one way; an article in the NGS' quarterly publication (thoroughly documented) presented something different. I went with the peer-reviewed NGS article, but explained the issue thoroughly, with footnotes, in the beginning Note Tag. This way, should I send a report to someone, it's explained why my work may differ from what they had. Whenever I run into a lineage where I'm up against a brick wall OR the material I find is untrustworthy, I use a similar beginning Note Tag to explain exactly what the various issues, as well as possibilities are - with every issue/idea thoroughly footnoted. In one case, where I lack only proof for a great-grandfather's parents, I entered his lineage (back to the English Civil Wars) which was traceable up to that of his parents into one of these beginning Note Tags. So far, I've found not a single record to substantiate which man of three sons was his father. My sisters now can see this lineage and why I can't connect this man to a father thanks to the documented explanation in the beginning Note Tag. Regards, Toby

Linda, I do exactly the same with my Anecdotes (but then there are those gray-area anecdotes... to print or not to print...) Karla On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Linda M. Towne <manateemum@gmail.com> wrote: > Adding on to that - I added a second (custom) tag Anedote-No Print so I > could pick and choose family stories that I wanted to document but perhaps > not share with all and sundry because Grandma's cooking is a sweet anecdote > to share but Auntie's alcoholism might not be. > > >

At 6/15/2015 10:54, you wrote: >I have a ggg-grandfather for whom I have found competing ancestries in the >genealogical literature. One line is from an older book on the family in >print for many years, and the other is from articles on the same man >published in more recent journals like The Virginia Genealogist and The >American Genealogist. I have found discussions online of the disagreement >that pretty clearly indicate that until someone does some DNA testing and >publishes the results, there will be no clear answer as to which lineage is >correct. I'm not counting on living long enough to find out what the answer >might eventually be. > >I already have the older lineage entered in TMG for this man and am trying >to figure out a way to enter the competing lineage so that it's clear that >the basic question-just who were the ancestors of this guy, line A or line >B?-is clear to someone else looking at my database. I don't want to end up >with a project that seems to claim that one or the other is true, when in >fact I don't know which one to prefer. There really is not a best way to show this. You have to "make do" in the way that suits you best. Aside from variations on a theme, there are a number of ways to treat these situations and all have obvious disadvantages. One method I have tried allows full printing of both version of information. This essentially means that all data for both line is entered. The person that is common is also entered twice except I add a SAMEPERSON Tag with no date (to allow it to sort to the top and have the ID# of the duplicate persons and the First and Second Principals. The SAMEPERSON Tag is a quick reminder of the conflicting data and allows easy navigation between lines. The Sentence for the SAMEPERSON Tag is: [P] and [PO] [M]. with a commentary in the Memo to _very_ briefly explain the conflict. Most of the information regarding the conflicting data would be contained in the citations attached to the various Tags, but there is always some added information that needs describing and this Tag Memo is as good as any. A second method is similar to the above except the common person is not duplicated. The two set of parents remain entered fully, but you arbitrarily decide which line is (for the moment) the "true" line and that set of parents is entered as the parents of the common person. The other "untrue" line parents are entered for the common person, but an Non-Primary parents. This means that both lines are easily accessible. The main disadvantage of this method is that while the "true" line (as arbitrarily selected) may be printed normally, the "untrue" line will not print until the Primary ("true") and N on-Primary ("untrue") parents are swapped allowing the printing of the other ('untrue") line. The big problem with both methods is where there is other duplication in the lines. In most cases for me, the two lines are not completely different. That is, some of the ancestors are shown in both lines. So, it comes down to doing the same things above all over again and getting things very complicated. A third method is entering the "untrue" line persons (those not duplicated) and assigning SAMEPERSON Tags as appropriate. Printing of these lines mean that swapping of connections need to be made. A Variation of this is to create a "Holding" person and attaching persons to that person so that data may be 'stored' and thus easily available. In all methods, commentary may be added to fill out your thoughts and further explain data that you find. So, it's really your choice and when its all said and done, you won't be satisfied with almost any method. I have tried all the above (with minor variations as well) and nothing suit me. I have examples of al the above sprinkled throughout my project. Maybe I'll bite the bullet and settle on one someday but until then I'll just live with it all. Lee Hoffman/KY

Adding on to that - I added a second (custom) tag Anedote-No Print so I could pick and choose family stories that I wanted to document but perhaps not share with all and sundry because Grandma's cooking is a sweet anecdote to share but Auntie's alcoholism might not be. And like Karla - that's why I made the custom research tags (and colour coded them a bright (obnoxious) colour as well) - so that the research is separated from the stories and I can see the tags at a glance On 6/15/2015 11:22 AM, Karla Huebner via wrote: > One comment on Karen's use of Anecdote tags here... I used to throw a lot > of research-note type of stuff into Anecdote tags due to the nice free-form > structure, but concluded that (for me, at least) this was a big mistake. > When you want to control what does and doesn't print, it's best to have > research notes separated from anecdotes (family stories about Grandma's > cooking, etc.). I've spent quite a bit of time separating out the two types > of data since I had put so much into Anecdote tags. > > Just something to consider. > >

Barbara, How about, in the generation where the two lineages disagree, having no primary father but two Father-Can? (father candidates) Peace, Part of the Tree, Greg -----Original Message----- From: tmg-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:tmg-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barbara B Reitt via Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 10:54 AM To: TMG-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [TMG] How best to enter two competing ancestries for one person? I have a ggg-grandfather for whom I have found competing ancestries in the genealogical literature. One line is from an older book on the family in print for many years, and the other is from articles on the same man published in more recent journals like The Virginia Genealogist and The American Genealogist. I have found discussions online of the disagreement that pretty clearly indicate that until someone does some DNA testing and publishes the results, there will be no clear answer as to which lineage is correct. I'm not counting on living long enough to find out what the answer might eventually be. I already have the older lineage entered in TMG for this man and am trying to figure out a way to enter the competing lineage so that it's clear that the basic question-just who were the ancestors of this guy, line A or line B?-is clear to someone else looking at my database. I don't want to end up with a project that seems to claim that one or the other is true, when in fact I don't know which one to prefer. I'd welcome suggestions from anyone who has confronted a similar problem. Barbara The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG/ Instructions on how to subscribe to TMG: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TMG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

One comment on Karen's use of Anecdote tags here... I used to throw a lot of research-note type of stuff into Anecdote tags due to the nice free-form structure, but concluded that (for me, at least) this was a big mistake. When you want to control what does and doesn't print, it's best to have research notes separated from anecdotes (family stories about Grandma's cooking, etc.). I've spent quite a bit of time separating out the two types of data since I had put so much into Anecdote tags. Just something to consider. On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Karen Willard via <tmg@rootsweb.com> wrote: > >From this person forward in time there is little dispute, right? It's the > ancestors that are being argued over? I do have the same problem in my > files, a couple times. Here is what I have done > > First I enter the newly > discovered-as-a-result-of-reading-something-authoritative (like T.A.G.) > lineage for the person in question. and include an record for the person in > question a second time (as if 'twere a different person). Finally I write > up an Anecdote Tag, discussing all the arguments pro and con, and assign > the two versions of the troublesome person as P1 and P2 so that the > anecdote will follow both. I date the Anecdote Tag to be just before the > birthdate so it will list first. > > When browsing my project, I will spot the tag right away and be reminded of > the controversy. By clicking on the other person attached to the tag I can > be taken immediately to the alternate lineage. When printing out reports, > the tag serves to alert that there is a separate report I might wish to > also print out. > > > Karen Willard > Computer Archivist for Willard Family Association > One-Name Study: Willard (Williard, Willyard) > > >