Barbara L., No, I didn't use tag mapping when doing my Legacy import/cleanup. I also didn't use it when comparing my gedcom imports to Legacy and RM. I did that in early August, played around with both programs, and took a close look a some selected people with lots of events. That included checking what tags imported, how they imported, and how clean their narrative reports were. With non-enhanced gedcoms the two programs failed to import a similar number of tags, but not the same tag types. (Some tags were accepted by one program and accepted by the other.) This possibly is no longer a problem with the now enhanced TMG gedcom export and with RM's direct export and Legacy's future direct export. I ran TMG List Of reports for each of the no-imported tag types and used the lists for cleanup. For me, Legacy imported tag events much more cleanly that either RM's gedcom import or RM's direct import. Only RM's direct import imports witnesses and roles. Hopefully Legacy's direct import will also do that. Witnesses and roles were by far the most time consuming part of my cleanup. Exclusions are another big issue. I didn't include them in my Legacy import and have in my RM imports. For me, it works best not to include them. That's because neither program handles that import well. Legacy recognizes only [[ ]] as exclusion markers, so { } show in Notes. RM recognizes { }, but not - or --. John Cardinal told me how to check for exclusions with TMGU in a post on the TMG list. Barbara S. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Levergood via" <tmg-refugees@rootsweb.com> To: "Richard J Otter" <rjo7@Columbia.edu>; <tmg-refugees@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 7:29 AM Subject: Re: [REFUGEES] topic for website > On what I think is a related topic, I was chatting with someone about > collaboratively creating a mapping from TMG built-in tag types to what > ....