Mark Norton asked: > I'm trying to index people mentioned in memo fields. I'm using the > coding referencing the person's number in that family file, for example > (for the file's person number 392): "[INDEX:]People:#392[:INDEX]" That example was first introduced into the HELP topic "Available Format, Font and Ohter Codes" in Version 8, and remains in Version 9. I agree, Mark, that I can find no way to make that format work. It may have been a planned newfeature to be introduce with the newly written Version 8 report writer. But it does not seem to have been implemented. > Entering index coding with each person's name and dates directly > into the memo field would be a **lot* more work (especially for > females with multiple married names)... I am not sure why you need the explicit INDEX code? If a person is mentioned in a memo field using a Role reference, they will automatically be included in the standard Name index based on whichever of their Name tags is referenced in assigning them to the role. Michael

At 9/25/2015 21:31, Michael J. Hannah wrote: >I am not sure why you need the explicit INDEX code? If a person is >mentioned in a memo field using a Role reference, they will >automatically be included in the standard Name index based on whichever >of their Name tags is referenced in assigning them to the role. But that may be the very reason why Mark wants to use the explicit Index Code - that the person is not mentioned using a Role Reference. I suspect the Memo field in this case is really a very simple reference and to use a Role Reference (assuming Mark is using Roles) may may things somewhat more complex. Role References are not that complex, but to someone that does not use them, it is to them. In this case, I would simply use the text explicit version of the Index Code, e.g., [INDEX:]People:Smith, Joe[:INDEX] Lee

Mark Norton responded: > Many thanks for the responses to my question. Happy to try to help, Mark. > Lee is correct that I don’t use roles, but I’ll explore that option, > if it would simplify the placement of indexing in memos. It would not only simplify, it would make the use of the INDEX codes unnecessary as the indexing would be automatic. You link the person as a witness with some role (and as Terry notes the default role of "Witness" may be all you need). Then you use the appropriate role variable in the memo (e.g. "[WO]") in place of entering their name. > I would definitely be interested in knowing whether variables > referring to witnesses would indeed generate the entry of indexing... Yes, Mark, I specifically tested that it would before replying. > ... simply entering the name for index coding is the most > straightforward... But it would be necessary to also enter > the person’s dates By using the variables, the lifespan dates would be automatic and controlled by the Report Options. And if a witness' dates are changed as a result of further research, those changes will automatically be reflected in the index the next time the report is generated. > ... as well as their multiple names, in the case of women with > multiple marriages The TMG Name index is an index of the occurrances of specific "names", it is *not* an index of "people". Thus is will indicate every where a specific "name" is used. That was why I indicated (and tested) that >> If a person is mentioned in a memo field using a Role reference, >> they will automatically be included in the standard Name index >> based on whichever of their Name tags is referenced in assigning >> them to the role. So if you link a married woman as a witness, and specify the appropriate married Name tag when you link her as a witness, her mention in this tag text will show up on the index entry for that specific married name, and only that name. That is how the index works for all names. It lists every where that "name" occurs in the report. Using the variables instead of entering the name as text also means that if later research causes you to change that witness' name or its spelling, that change will automatically be reflected in the text of all the memos mentioning that person. I think you will find that using Roles is not difficult. I suggest you begin by reviewing Terry's excellent introduction on his web site: http://tmg.reigelridge.com/Roles.htm Hope this gives you ideas, Michael