At 09:30 PM 3/11/2017, Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: >It has been a long time and a few versions of Windows since I have zipped >up a file. Please send me a quick course in the same. In recent versions of Windows, one multi-selects (click first, shift-click last, to select a range; or, click first, control-click others, if they are not a contiguous range). Right-click Send To Compressed (zipped) folder Otherwise, one could download a compression utility (7-Zip has been mentioned, but is NOT to my knowledge, native even in Win10 Pro -- given that I installed "7z1514-x64.exe" on Feb 2, and due to a disk failure had to upgrade to Win10Pro early last Dec; hmmm, I'm out-of-date 1604 is now available) http://www.7-zip.org/download.html -- bieber.genealogy@earthlink.net Dennis Lee Bieber HTTP://home.earthlink.net/~bieber.genealogy/

It has been a long time and a few versions of Windows since I have zipped up a file. Please send me a quick course in the same. Robin , if this is going to take a lot of your time - it is not worth it - the project has just over a 1000 individuals and I can create a new project and do a lot of cut and paste. Being the project is so old and started when we were new to the program - there is also a large amount of cleanup and changes/additions that need to be made. So again, it is not worth you taking a lot of your time. We do really appreciate the offer. As for the back ups - I do have a number from this and previous versions and they all have the same corruption. Apparently, I have just been carrying it forward every new version and since not working on it have not noticed the problem. Michael and Lee thank you so much for your input - Lee, as to the other tags - we have used some of them and they do not seem to have a problem. Thanks again to all Kathy & Larry On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:03 PM, robin lamacraft < robin.lamacraft@internode.on.net> wrote: > The relationship tags are a special set within TMG. Although they are > stored with the other tag definitions, there are marked as special and go > through a different processing pathway. > > The results of your experiments suggest that it is the _F.dbf table that > has the corruption as you can create new, correctly-labelled relationships > which has been done using the data in the _T table. > > *Can you please zip up the files <YourProjectName>_F.DBF and > <YourProjectName>_F.FPT and send them to me to examine? * > > IF you don't know how to do this then ask this list and you will get a > reply. > > From that pair of files, I will be able to determine what has happened and > whether it is easily fixable. It would be useful to know whether there are > any intentional uses of -ADO suffex in your project and if so to send a > list of the IDs those example children. > > Robin > > > > On 12-Mar-17 06:19 AM, Lee Hoffman/KY wrote: > >> At 3/11/2017 12:02, Michael J Hannah wrote >> >>> Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: >>> >>>> To add an adopted son [I have never had to do that] >>>> >>> >>> Your method confirms the above, but for your future information... >>> >>> To add a specific "type" of child to a person, use the Add Tag >>> function. Now choose the Son-ado or Daughter-ado tag type to add that >>> relationship to a parent. The Tag Entry screen will propagate the Parent >>> ID with the ID of this person, but the Child ID will be zero. To connect >>> to an existing person as the child simply enter their ID number or search >>> for them with the Binocs. Instead if you are adding a new person as the >>> child, put the cursor in the Child ID entry field and click on the Add >>> Person icon in the upper right corner. >>> >>> Takes a whole lot longer to describe than to do the actions of a couple >>> of clicks. >>> >> >> Note that Michael's method is good -- especially if you are only adding >> the child to one parent. If another parent is involved then you need to do >> the same process for that parent. >> >> As an alternative method, I suggest adding the child to both parents as >> normal. -- selecting the other parent (or not) when asked. Then in the >> child's Person View, double-click on the [Father] Tag Type to display the >> Relationship Tag Entry Screen. Then, click on the [Tag Type ] button to >> select the Father-Adopted (or other appropriate ) relationship. and click >> [OK] to close that window. Now, do the same thing for the [Mother] Tag Type. >> >> Both methods get to the same result. With Michael's, you have to >> remember to add the child to the second parent. With mine, you have to >> remember to change the Relationship for both parents. It is really just >> personal preference. >> >> I like this second method as it is more (to me) straight forward and >> follows what I do most of the time. I just need to change the Relationship >> Tags Types for the situation. >> >> If no other versions restore or open correctly the only option I know to >>> do is to hope one of our advanced users will offer to manually modify the >>> database tables for you. However this is a very risky option since if this >>> Relationship type entry is corrupted there is a good chance there are other >>> corruptions which are not as clearly evident. >>> >> >> I would agree. In fact, I suggest that you look at the project to see >> if you have any of the following Tag Types in use: >> Stake >> AFN >> Telephone >> Namesake >> Number of Marriages >> Number of Children >> Age >> Nationality >> SSN >> Description >> HTML >> Narrative Children >> JournalIntro >> Journal Conclusion >> >> If any are used, check them out to see if they seem to be as you expect. >> Also, Look at any Note and History Tags to see that they seem normal. >> >> If all these seem to be normal, then only the Relationship Tags are off >> although I cannot think why. >> >> Lee >> >> >> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances >> try.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 > > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances > try.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 >

At 3/11/2017 12:02, Michael J Hannah wrote >Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: >>To add an adopted son [I have never had to do that] > >Your method confirms the above, but for your future information... > >To add a specific "type" of child to a person, use the Add Tag >function. Now choose the Son-ado or Daughter-ado tag type to add >that relationship to a parent. The Tag Entry screen will propagate >the Parent ID with the ID of this person, but the Child ID will be >zero. To connect to an existing person as the child simply enter >their ID number or search for them with the Binocs. Instead if you >are adding a new person as the child, put the cursor in the Child ID >entry field and click on the Add Person icon in the upper right corner. > >Takes a whole lot longer to describe than to do the actions of a >couple of clicks. Note that Michael's method is good -- especially if you are only adding the child to one parent. If another parent is involved then you need to do the same process for that parent. As an alternative method, I suggest adding the child to both parents as normal. -- selecting the other parent (or not) when asked. Then in the child's Person View, double-click on the [Father] Tag Type to display the Relationship Tag Entry Screen. Then, click on the [Tag Type ] button to select the Father-Adopted (or other appropriate ) relationship. and click [OK] to close that window. Now, do the same thing for the [Mother] Tag Type. Both methods get to the same result. With Michael's, you have to remember to add the child to the second parent. With mine, you have to remember to change the Relationship for both parents. It is really just personal preference. I like this second method as it is more (to me) straight forward and follows what I do most of the time. I just need to change the Relationship Tags Types for the situation. >If no other versions restore or open correctly the only option I >know to do is to hope one of our advanced users will offer to >manually modify the database tables for you. However this is a very >risky option since if this Relationship type entry is corrupted >there is a good chance there are other corruptions which are not as >clearly evident. I would agree. In fact, I suggest that you look at the project to see if you have any of the following Tag Types in use: Stake AFN Telephone Namesake Number of Marriages Number of Children Age Nationality SSN Description HTML Narrative Children JournalIntro Journal Conclusion If any are used, check them out to see if they seem to be as you expect. Also, Look at any Note and History Tags to see that they seem normal. If all these seem to be normal, then only the Relationship Tags are off although I cannot think why. Lee

Lee Hoffman commented: > Note that Michael's method is good -- > especially if you are only adding the child to one parent... > As an alternative method, I suggest adding the child > to both parents as normal. -- selecting the other parent > (or not) when asked... > Both methods get to the same result. With Michael's, > you have to remember to add the child to the second parent. > With mine, you have to remember to change the Relationship > for both parents. It is really just personal preference. Completely agree, Lee. Actually I think it appropriate to know about both methods (Add Tag, or Add Person) so you can use whichever one is easiest for the given situation. Michael

This problem is probably due to some entries in the <YourProjectName>_F.DBF being corrupt. The _F table holds all parent-child relationships. It can get quite large. It looks like the value for PTYPE (parent type) is incorrect. This value is looked up what is to be added to the parent and child tag names. The table being looked into <YourProjectName>_F.DBF is possibly corrupt or its indexing is corrupted. The _T table is the tag definition table, typically about 150 records depending on the number of custom tags definitions. I have no idea of how to fix this easily. The testto identify which file is creating the problem is in adding a new parent-child relationships. Try adding one non-primary relationship which should be -BIO and another non-primary that you select to be -ADO, then look at the result. Please communicate that outcome. RobinL On 11-Mar-17 12:39 PM, Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: > Michael, > Thank you so much for your response. Also, sorry to take so long to get > back - we have had an elecrical outage and separately internet down as > well. Your description of the son-bio, daughter-bio and father, mother > labels is exactly what we have on our main project. All of our projects are > and always have been English U.S. - we have never messed with that feature. > On this one project and only this one - all father & mother relationships > are father-ado & mother-ado, as well as the child relationships being > son-ado & dau-ado. This is probably important - when we add new > individuals, the -ados are gone. That would seem to confirm it is not a > language problem. Looking forward to your thoughts on how to correct. > Again, Thank you > Kathy & Larry > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Michael J Hannah <mjh@rr-nm.net> wrote: > >> One slight correction to my previous post. >> >> Michael J Hannah wrote: >> >>> if the Relationship tag linking a parent and a child is the -bio tag you >>> should see: >>> >>> - in a parent's view the child assigned that Relationship tag would show >>> Son-Bio or Daughter-Bio. >>> >>> - in the child's view the parent(s) assigned that Relationship tag would >>> "just" show Mother or Father. >>> >> Well, that is correct "if" the parent is Primary. When Primary the -bio >> is stripped so you "just" see Mother or Father. >> >> But if the Relationship tag is not set for this parent to be Primary, then >> the tag shows in the Details section instead of in the parental section >> with the tag label Mother-Bio or Father-Bio. Relationship tag types which >> are not -bio never have their tag type suffix stripped even if the tag is >> set for this parent to be Primary. Hope that is clearer. >> >> >> Michael >> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances >> try.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

Thank you Robin, OK I added a biological son to a male who already had an adopted daughter [from program error] it entered correctly. To add an adopted son [I have never had to do that] all I know to do is to add normally as biological and then change to adopted - in so doing the relationships came out correctly. I also reconfirmed that it is the entire data base before that is effected. On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 1:02 AM, robin lamacraft < robin.lamacraft@internode.on.net> wrote: > I did not expect you to open those files !! I was saying that they were > the most likely places where the error had occurred. > > Did you try from within TMG to temporarily add 2 new male persons to a > another male personas his son, the first as their _biological_ son and the > second male at the _adopted _son. > > When then look at them or their parent (Person Details screen) Do the new > relationship tag labels look correct? *Are they correct or is one of or > both of them are wrong?* > > Please respond with a description of what happened. That is what I need to > know to work out what is the next move. > > RobinL > > > > On 11-Mar-17 02:43 PM, Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: > >> Thanks for responding - I just am not that computer literate >> >> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:58 PM, robin lamacraft < >> robin.lamacraft@internode.on.net> wrote: >> >> This problem is probably due to some entries in the >>> <YourProjectName>_F.DBF being corrupt. The _F table holds all >>> parent-child >>> relationships. It can get quite large. >>> >>> It looks like the value for PTYPE (parent type) is incorrect. This value >>> is looked up what is to be added to the parent and child tag names. >>> >>> The table being looked into <YourProjectName>_F.DBF is possibly corrupt >>> or >>> its indexing is corrupted. The _T table is the tag definition table, >>> typically about 150 records depending on the number of custom tags >>> definitions. >>> >>> I have no idea of how to fix this easily. The testto identify which file >>> is creating the problem is in adding a new parent-child relationships. >>> Try >>> adding one non-primary relationship which should be -BIO and another >>> non-primary that you select to be -ADO, then look at the result. Please >>> communicate that outcome. >>> >>> RobinL >>> >>> >>> >>> On 11-Mar-17 12:39 PM, Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: >>> >>> Michael, >>>> Thank you so much for your response. Also, sorry to take so long to get >>>> back - we have had an elecrical outage and separately internet down as >>>> well. Your description of the son-bio, daughter-bio and father, mother >>>> labels is exactly what we have on our main project. All of our projects >>>> are >>>> and always have been English U.S. - we have never messed with that >>>> feature. >>>> On this one project and only this one - all father & mother >>>> relationships >>>> are father-ado & mother-ado, as well as the child relationships being >>>> son-ado & dau-ado. This is probably important - when we add new >>>> individuals, the -ados are gone. That would seem to confirm it is not a >>>> language problem. Looking forward to your thoughts on how to correct. >>>> Again, Thank you >>>> Kathy & Larry >>>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Michael J Hannah <mjh@rr-nm.net> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> One slight correction to my previous post. >>>> >>>>> Michael J Hannah wrote: >>>>> >>>>> if the Relationship tag linking a parent and a child is the -bio tag >>>>> you >>>>> >>>>>> should see: >>>>>> >>>>>> - in a parent's view the child assigned that Relationship tag would >>>>>> show >>>>>> Son-Bio or Daughter-Bio. >>>>>> >>>>>> - in the child's view the parent(s) assigned that Relationship tag >>>>>> would >>>>>> "just" show Mother or Father. >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, that is correct "if" the parent is Primary. When Primary the >>>>>> -bio >>>>>> >>>>> is stripped so you "just" see Mother or Father. >>>>> >>>>> But if the Relationship tag is not set for this parent to be Primary, >>>>> then >>>>> the tag shows in the Details section instead of in the parental section >>>>> with the tag label Mother-Bio or Father-Bio. Relationship tag types >>>>> which >>>>> are not -bio never have their tag type suffix stripped even if the tag >>>>> is >>>>> set for this parent to be Primary. Hope that is clearer. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>>> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances >>>>> try.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.ances >>>>> >>>> try.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 >>> >>> >>> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances >>> try.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.ances >> try.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 > > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances > try.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 >

Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: > OK I added a biological son to a male... it entered correctly. Which confirms that the database is the problem, not the program. For some reason the Relationship table entries Robin mentioned are wrong. > To add an adopted son [I have never had to do that] Your method confirms the above, but for your future information... To add a specific "type" of child to a person, use the Add Tag function. Now choose the Son-ado or Daughter-ado tag type to add that relationship to a parent. The Tag Entry screen will propagate the Parent ID with the ID of this person, but the Child ID will be zero. To connect to an existing person as the child simply enter their ID number or search for them with the Binocs. Instead if you are adding a new person as the child, put the cursor in the Child ID entry field and click on the Add Person icon in the upper right corner. Takes a whole lot longer to describe than to do the actions of a couple of clicks. So what to do now. You started this thread with: > We just opened an old project that we have not worked > on in literally years. It has been converted several times > from version to version. If you really have not "worked on" (changed) this project in years, is it possible you have other alternate backups (.sqz files) of this identical unchanged project, possibly from different versions of the program, which are still available? If so I would first suggest trying to restore different ones of them to see if one of them will restore correctly. Just restore them either as different names or into different folders so you don't get them confused. If you don't have backups, possibly you have all the files of the project from a different earlier version of the program in a folder which you can now open in V9. If no other versions restore or open correctly the only option I know to do is to hope one of our advanced users will offer to manually modify the database tables for you. However this is a very risky option since if this Relationship type entry is corrupted there is a good chance there are other corruptions which are not as clearly evident. Michael

Thanks for responding - I just am not that computer literate On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:58 PM, robin lamacraft < robin.lamacraft@internode.on.net> wrote: > This problem is probably due to some entries in the > <YourProjectName>_F.DBF being corrupt. The _F table holds all parent-child > relationships. It can get quite large. > > It looks like the value for PTYPE (parent type) is incorrect. This value > is looked up what is to be added to the parent and child tag names. > > The table being looked into <YourProjectName>_F.DBF is possibly corrupt or > its indexing is corrupted. The _T table is the tag definition table, > typically about 150 records depending on the number of custom tags > definitions. > > I have no idea of how to fix this easily. The testto identify which file > is creating the problem is in adding a new parent-child relationships. Try > adding one non-primary relationship which should be -BIO and another > non-primary that you select to be -ADO, then look at the result. Please > communicate that outcome. > > RobinL > > > > On 11-Mar-17 12:39 PM, Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: > >> Michael, >> Thank you so much for your response. Also, sorry to take so long to get >> back - we have had an elecrical outage and separately internet down as >> well. Your description of the son-bio, daughter-bio and father, mother >> labels is exactly what we have on our main project. All of our projects >> are >> and always have been English U.S. - we have never messed with that >> feature. >> On this one project and only this one - all father & mother relationships >> are father-ado & mother-ado, as well as the child relationships being >> son-ado & dau-ado. This is probably important - when we add new >> individuals, the -ados are gone. That would seem to confirm it is not a >> language problem. Looking forward to your thoughts on how to correct. >> Again, Thank you >> Kathy & Larry >> >> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Michael J Hannah <mjh@rr-nm.net> wrote: >> >> One slight correction to my previous post. >>> >>> Michael J Hannah wrote: >>> >>> if the Relationship tag linking a parent and a child is the -bio tag you >>>> should see: >>>> >>>> - in a parent's view the child assigned that Relationship tag would show >>>> Son-Bio or Daughter-Bio. >>>> >>>> - in the child's view the parent(s) assigned that Relationship tag would >>>> "just" show Mother or Father. >>>> >>>> Well, that is correct "if" the parent is Primary. When Primary the -bio >>> is stripped so you "just" see Mother or Father. >>> >>> But if the Relationship tag is not set for this parent to be Primary, >>> then >>> the tag shows in the Details section instead of in the parental section >>> with the tag label Mother-Bio or Father-Bio. Relationship tag types >>> which >>> are not -bio never have their tag type suffix stripped even if the tag is >>> set for this parent to be Primary. Hope that is clearer. >>> >>> >>> Michael >>> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances >>> try.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.ances >> try.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 > > > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances > try.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 >

I have done all the maintenance - nothing changed - thanks for responding On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Kathy & Larry McCurdy <tmg4kala@gmail.com> wrote: > I 'm sorry Robin, I have no idea how to open those files. > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:58 PM, robin lamacraft < > robin.lamacraft@internode.on.net> wrote: > >> This problem is probably due to some entries in the >> <YourProjectName>_F.DBF being corrupt. The _F table holds all parent-child >> relationships. It can get quite large. >> >> It looks like the value for PTYPE (parent type) is incorrect. This value >> is looked up what is to be added to the parent and child tag names. >> >> The table being looked into <YourProjectName>_F.DBF is possibly corrupt >> or its indexing is corrupted. The _T table is the tag definition table, >> typically about 150 records depending on the number of custom tags >> definitions. >> >> I have no idea of how to fix this easily. The testto identify which file >> is creating the problem is in adding a new parent-child relationships. Try >> adding one non-primary relationship which should be -BIO and another >> non-primary that you select to be -ADO, then look at the result. Please >> communicate that outcome. >> >> RobinL >> >> >> >> On 11-Mar-17 12:39 PM, Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: >> >>> Michael, >>> Thank you so much for your response. Also, sorry to take so long to get >>> back - we have had an elecrical outage and separately internet down as >>> well. Your description of the son-bio, daughter-bio and father, mother >>> labels is exactly what we have on our main project. All of our projects >>> are >>> and always have been English U.S. - we have never messed with that >>> feature. >>> On this one project and only this one - all father & mother relationships >>> are father-ado & mother-ado, as well as the child relationships being >>> son-ado & dau-ado. This is probably important - when we add new >>> individuals, the -ados are gone. That would seem to confirm it is not a >>> language problem. Looking forward to your thoughts on how to correct. >>> Again, Thank you >>> Kathy & Larry >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Michael J Hannah <mjh@rr-nm.net> wrote: >>> >>> One slight correction to my previous post. >>>> >>>> Michael J Hannah wrote: >>>> >>>> if the Relationship tag linking a parent and a child is the -bio tag you >>>>> should see: >>>>> >>>>> - in a parent's view the child assigned that Relationship tag would >>>>> show >>>>> Son-Bio or Daughter-Bio. >>>>> >>>>> - in the child's view the parent(s) assigned that Relationship tag >>>>> would >>>>> "just" show Mother or Father. >>>>> >>>>> Well, that is correct "if" the parent is Primary. When Primary the >>>> -bio >>>> is stripped so you "just" see Mother or Father. >>>> >>>> But if the Relationship tag is not set for this parent to be Primary, >>>> then >>>> the tag shows in the Details section instead of in the parental section >>>> with the tag label Mother-Bio or Father-Bio. Relationship tag types >>>> which >>>> are not -bio never have their tag type suffix stripped even if the tag >>>> is >>>> set for this parent to be Primary. Hope that is clearer. >>>> >>>> >>>> Michael >>>> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances >>>> try.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.ances >>> try.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 >> >> >> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances >> try.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 >> > >

I 'm sorry Robin, I have no idea how to open those files. On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:58 PM, robin lamacraft < robin.lamacraft@internode.on.net> wrote: > This problem is probably due to some entries in the > <YourProjectName>_F.DBF being corrupt. The _F table holds all parent-child > relationships. It can get quite large. > > It looks like the value for PTYPE (parent type) is incorrect. This value > is looked up what is to be added to the parent and child tag names. > > The table being looked into <YourProjectName>_F.DBF is possibly corrupt or > its indexing is corrupted. The _T table is the tag definition table, > typically about 150 records depending on the number of custom tags > definitions. > > I have no idea of how to fix this easily. The testto identify which file > is creating the problem is in adding a new parent-child relationships. Try > adding one non-primary relationship which should be -BIO and another > non-primary that you select to be -ADO, then look at the result. Please > communicate that outcome. > > RobinL > > > > On 11-Mar-17 12:39 PM, Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote: > >> Michael, >> Thank you so much for your response. Also, sorry to take so long to get >> back - we have had an elecrical outage and separately internet down as >> well. Your description of the son-bio, daughter-bio and father, mother >> labels is exactly what we have on our main project. All of our projects >> are >> and always have been English U.S. - we have never messed with that >> feature. >> On this one project and only this one - all father & mother relationships >> are father-ado & mother-ado, as well as the child relationships being >> son-ado & dau-ado. This is probably important - when we add new >> individuals, the -ados are gone. That would seem to confirm it is not a >> language problem. Looking forward to your thoughts on how to correct. >> Again, Thank you >> Kathy & Larry >> >> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Michael J Hannah <mjh@rr-nm.net> wrote: >> >> One slight correction to my previous post. >>> >>> Michael J Hannah wrote: >>> >>> if the Relationship tag linking a parent and a child is the -bio tag you >>>> should see: >>>> >>>> - in a parent's view the child assigned that Relationship tag would show >>>> Son-Bio or Daughter-Bio. >>>> >>>> - in the child's view the parent(s) assigned that Relationship tag would >>>> "just" show Mother or Father. >>>> >>>> Well, that is correct "if" the parent is Primary. When Primary the -bio >>> is stripped so you "just" see Mother or Father. >>> >>> But if the Relationship tag is not set for this parent to be Primary, >>> then >>> the tag shows in the Details section instead of in the parental section >>> with the tag label Mother-Bio or Father-Bio. Relationship tag types >>> which >>> are not -bio never have their tag type suffix stripped even if the tag is >>> set for this parent to be Primary. Hope that is clearer. >>> >>> >>> Michael >>> The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances >>> try.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.ances >> try.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 > > > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances > try.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 >

At 3/6/2017 22:24, Kathy & Larry McCurdy wrote >We just opened an old project that we have not worked on in literally >years. It has been converted several times from version to version. To our >amazement, all of the relationship tags have -ado instead of -bio or in >case of parents, just father & mother. We have no idea how these became >this way, but we would really like to get them changed back. We are using >9.05, is there any way that John's utility program will do it? Any help >would be greatly appreciated! Have you tried the File=>Maintenance=>Validate File Integrity? Lee

Michael, Thank you so much for your response. Also, sorry to take so long to get back - we have had an elecrical outage and separately internet down as well. Your description of the son-bio, daughter-bio and father, mother labels is exactly what we have on our main project. All of our projects are and always have been English U.S. - we have never messed with that feature. On this one project and only this one - all father & mother relationships are father-ado & mother-ado, as well as the child relationships being son-ado & dau-ado. This is probably important - when we add new individuals, the -ados are gone. That would seem to confirm it is not a language problem. Looking forward to your thoughts on how to correct. Again, Thank you Kathy & Larry On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Michael J Hannah <mjh@rr-nm.net> wrote: > One slight correction to my previous post. > > Michael J Hannah wrote: > >> if the Relationship tag linking a parent and a child is the -bio tag you >> should see: >> >> - in a parent's view the child assigned that Relationship tag would show >> Son-Bio or Daughter-Bio. >> >> - in the child's view the parent(s) assigned that Relationship tag would >> "just" show Mother or Father. >> > > Well, that is correct "if" the parent is Primary. When Primary the -bio > is stripped so you "just" see Mother or Father. > > But if the Relationship tag is not set for this parent to be Primary, then > the tag shows in the Details section instead of in the parental section > with the tag label Mother-Bio or Father-Bio. Relationship tag types which > are not -bio never have their tag type suffix stripped even if the tag is > set for this parent to be Primary. Hope that is clearer. > > > Michael > The TMG archive is found here: http://archiver.rootsweb.ances > try.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 for clarifying. Will take good care of my installers and backups in case something happens. If my Windows 7 crashes ,I also have installation disk for it. -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: TMG [mailto:tmg-bounces+gj_erov7=bbnett.no@rootsweb.com] På vegne av Dennis Lee Bieber Sendt: 8. mars 2017 03:58 Til: The Master Genealogist Rootsweb Email List <tmg@rootsweb.com> Kopi: 'The Master Genealogist Rootsweb Email List' <tmg@rootsweb.com> Emne: Re: [TMG] two tmgs on the same computer At 05:50 PM 3/7/2017, Erik Hov wrote: >I do have both the installers ,and also the installed programs with >files etc. You'll need the installers to put the program onto a different computer. But until you /need/ to run that particular version of the program there is no need to execute the installer for it beforehand. >You said I didn`t need to install the application....I guess the >application is within the installer then?. I already have tmg 7 and 8 >on my Windows 64 bit ,and have lots of backups...especially from v8 >that I have used for some years. Data set backups are not the program itself -- and having had my system drive fail in December I can vouch for needing the installers; not even a full system back-up was usable (for one thing, the most recent save set ended up corrupted, so the usable system back-up was a year old) -- as I didn't have Win7 installation disks I had to upgrade to Win10 and reinstall all the applications. I was able to copy my data files from the failed drive with the result that, by setting up the same username, once the applications were reinstalled, all the data was... just there (including browser profile, email set-up, etc.) -- bieber.genealogy@earthlink.net Dennis Lee Bieber HTTP://home.earthlink.net/~bieber.genealogy/ 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

On 3/5/2017 8:12 PM, Elsa Vorwerk wrote: > Despite checking “Suppress details for living people” in > TMG Wizard Step 5, all living persons were included in > the Gedcom created. This is my very first time doing a > Gedcom from TMG, and tried to follow Terry’s guidelines, > but would appreciate someone setting me straight about > NOT including living persons, and also whether there is > some sort of rule like what we use in Second Site for not > including anyone lacking death information who was born > within a certain number of years ago. > Elisa, Checking "Suppress Details for Living People" does exactly what it says - it suppresses the details. It does not exclude the name of the person. If you want a person totally excluded from a GEDCOM you must manually select who is to be included. You can either collect everyone to be included in a Focus Group, or you can Select them in the Project Explorer. The latter is probably easier in this case. You can create a filter using the Living Flag = N, use that to filter the PE, then select everyone who then appears in the PE. There is no detailed provision for specifying what type of information is included for various types of people as there is in Second Site. Terry Reigel

Purpose is to archive things for potential future reference. I do have both the installers ,and also the installed programs with files etc. I wasn`t sure about which Windowsversion to choose ,and have been looking for an answer to that for a month or so to be sure what I should choose. Since I have Windows 7 64 bit now ,I haven`t been able to run all in that system. The newer versions as 7 8 and 9 are working good there. Version 7 and older and all the other versions works in XP ,so I realize I must have some Windows 32 bit ,but maybe not Windows XP. I will have 32 bit Windows a you mentioned exactly because it can run 16 bit modules as that TMG report writer. You said I didn`t need to install the application....I guess the application is within the installer then?. I already have tmg 7 and 8 on my Windows 64 bit ,and have lots of backups...especially from v8 that I have used for some years. -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: TMG [mailto:tmg-bounces+gj_erov7=bbnett.no@rootsweb.com] På vegne av Dennis Lee Bieber Sendt: 7. mars 2017 22:57 Til: The Master Genealogist Rootsweb Email List <tmg@rootsweb.com> Kopi: 'The Master Genealogist Rootsweb Email List' <tmg@rootsweb.com> Emne: Re: [TMG] two tmgs on the same computer At 04:14 PM 3/7/2017, Erik Hov wrote: >Thanks for answering my question. I now know that I can`t have both >8.04 and >8.08 on the same computer since 8.08 will overwrite 8.04. Not any >purpose of having both of them if one of them overwrites the other!. >The reason I asked is because I plan to have one computer where I store >all of those old programs and all pictures etc I want to keep for the future. There is a big difference between having copies of the INSTALLER and having copies of the INSTALLED... If the purpose is to archive things for potential future reference, you probably want to keep one machine running 32-bit windows (though Win7 should be okay -- only a few applications are tied to WinXP)... Reason: 32-bit Windows may still be able to run some 16-bit modules (TMG report writer through TMG7). But you don't need to install the application; just save the installer until you find a need for it, and /then/ install the program.0 -- bieber.genealogy@earthlink.net Dennis Lee Bieber HTTP://home.earthlink.net/~bieber.genealogy/ 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 Roots Users Group "RUG" of Arlington, Virginia (the Washington, DC area TMG Users group) will meet on Saturday, March 111, 2017, from 9:00 am to 12:00 am (Eastern Standard Time). 09:00 am EST Session I: “Roots Magic - Everything You Ever Wanted in a Genealogy Software” Presenter: Gary Petranek 10:30 am EST Session 2: “Where Did My Ancestor Live?” - Creating a Pseudo-Person in TMG to Trace Land Records Presenter: Madeline Van Hoose NOTE: Join.me has a recent update that takes awhile to load. Your probably want to update well before the meeting and try to familiarize yourself with the somewhat revised interface. All are invited to attend the meeting in person or join us online via Join.Me. Our online meeting is open to everyone, not just members! For online access, download the FREE Join.Me app from thehttp://www.join.me/apps website, install it and join our meeting using our JOIN.ME ACCESS CODE: “rugmeeting” without quotes. There is a Q&A page on the Join.Me site which can help if you are having difficulties.http://help.join.me/knowledgebase. MEETING LOCATION: We still meet 'in person' in Northern Virginia near Tyson's Corner, about 2 miles inside the beltway (I-495) on Route 123. Members and guests are welcome! We meet in the newer building on the lower level. Trinity United Methodist Church (UMC) 1205 Dolley Madison Boulevard McLean, VA 22101-3019 For directions see our website:http://www.rootsusers.org/TrinityUMCLocation.html. Regards, Janis Parkison Rodriguez VP Arlington RUG

Thanks for answering my question. I now know that I can`t have both 8.04 and 8.08 on the same computer since 8.08 will overwrite 8.04. Not any purpose of having both of them if one of them overwrites the other!. The reason I asked is because I plan to have one computer where I store all of those old programs and all pictures etc I want to keep for the future. What I have planned is to have one computer that I will keep all old programs etc on ,and that it shall not have internet ,but I am not sure of which Windows system I should choose to have on it. (XP or Windows 7 32 bit.) I do have TMG 9.05 ,but haven`t installed it yet ,but will install it since I keep on using TMG!. I do have Windows 7 64 bit ,and have also TMG 7.04 and 8.04 there as of now. I have TMG 4.0 (upgraded from 3.5) and also another oooold genealogysoftware "Family Edge Plus" that doesn`t run on 64 bit. Just now, these older TMG and "family edge plus" are kept in a XP computer ,but I still want to keep these programs ,and also that they shall continue to work in the future. I tried them in Windows 7 Pro 32 bit and both TMG and Family Edge worked. Family edge is DOS based ,so I had to use DosBox for it to run properly . Have no idea which is fastest of XP or Windows 7 Pro 7 with DosBox when it comes to run these old programs.... Of course I can run all of these in XP ,and that`s the easiest (!) ,but XP doesn`t last forever ,and can`t be installed on newer computers as I understand it. Guess it may be better to store everything old in a Windows 7 Pro/Ultimate 32 bit computer even if you have to use DosBox to run the old Dos programs.....at least it is more future in Windows 7 than XP..... -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: TMG [mailto:tmg-bounces+gj_erov7=bbnett.no@rootsweb.com] På vegne av Lee Hoffman/KY Sendt: 7. mars 2017 19:34 Til: The Master Genealogist Rootsweb Email List <tmg@rootsweb.com> Emne: Re: [TMG] two tmgs on the same computer At 3/7/2017 12:47, Erik Hov wrote >Just wonder ,how would it be to have Tmg 8.04 and Tmg 8.8 on the same >computer?.....would it be some conflict since they are both of the >version 8? You cannot install two instances of the _same_major_ version of TMG as one would overwrite the other. It is possible to install a copy of each _major_ version of TMG. I currently have the latest versions of TMG versions, 7, 8, and 9 as well as a copy of TMG v4. I regularly open v9. The others are mainly used to help other users. I have not opened v7 or v8 in quite some time although a local friend still uses v4 a bit and often calls me for help -- mostly because he hasn't used the program for a long time. Having said this, what would be the purpose or advantage of having two installations of the same major versions but of different minor version? Essentially there are no differences between the two other than some bug fixes and some relatively minor new features. Tell us what you want to do and we can help you out. Lee 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

At 05:50 PM 3/7/2017, Erik Hov wrote: >I do have both the installers ,and also the installed programs with files >etc. You'll need the installers to put the program onto a different computer. But until you /need/ to run that particular version of the program there is no need to execute the installer for it beforehand. >You said I didn`t need to install the application....I guess the application >is within the installer then?. I already have tmg 7 and 8 on my Windows 64 >bit ,and have lots of backups...especially from v8 that I have used for some >years. Data set backups are not the program itself -- and having had my system drive fail in December I can vouch for needing the installers; not even a full system back-up was usable (for one thing, the most recent save set ended up corrupted, so the usable system back-up was a year old) -- as I didn't have Win7 installation disks I had to upgrade to Win10 and reinstall all the applications. I was able to copy my data files from the failed drive with the result that, by setting up the same username, once the applications were reinstalled, all the data was... just there (including browser profile, email set-up, etc.) -- bieber.genealogy@earthlink.net Dennis Lee Bieber HTTP://home.earthlink.net/~bieber.genealogy/

At 3/7/2017 17:24, Erik Hov wrote >True!. You don`t need the older versions if you don`t use them ,and tmg 9 >still take backups to be imported or opened. >I jumped a big jump from tmg 3.5 or 4 to tmg 7 ,a big jump ,and the tmg was >better than version 4. Version 4 seemed a bit unstable at times.... >Then v8 came ,better than the 7 ,and then at last we now have 9.05 ,who >might be the best (?) ,even if I haven`t tried it yet. I have never found TMG to be unstable in any version. There was one slight problem with one upgrade, but that was quickly fixed. Other than that, TMG has been remarkably stable. The few bugs that have appeared in all the new versions were mostly minor and often just cosmetic. Lee

At 04:14 PM 3/7/2017, Erik Hov wrote: >Thanks for answering my question. I now know that I can`t have both 8.04 and >8.08 on the same computer since 8.08 will overwrite 8.04. Not any purpose of >having both of them if one of them overwrites the other!. The reason I asked >is because I plan to have one computer where I store all of those old >programs and all pictures etc I want to keep for the future. There is a big difference between having copies of the INSTALLER and having copies of the INSTALLED... If the purpose is to archive things for potential future reference, you probably want to keep one machine running 32-bit windows (though Win7 should be okay -- only a few applications are tied to WinXP)... Reason: 32-bit Windows may still be able to run some 16-bit modules (TMG report writer through TMG7). But you don't need to install the application; just save the installer until you find a need for it, and /then/ install the program.0 -- bieber.genealogy@earthlink.net Dennis Lee Bieber HTTP://home.earthlink.net/~bieber.genealogy/