stormsstephen

I appreciate the information about the GEDCOM import. I do indeed have the original file, and I should indeed try several GEDCOM export options from FTM16 while I continue to play with the direct import. I'm still finding my way around the TMG program, and looking for guidance in several of those websites you suggested.

I'm in no big rush to make that "final import" from FTM16 to TMG, at least not until I'm more comfortable with TMG. For the present, I'm continuing to edit for consistency in FTM (guided by the Master Place List output in TMG, for instance), and add new data in FTM, then export to TMG to test for consistency.

Whilst GEDCOM is supposed to be a "standard", the developers that use it must have very different ideas of what the standard is, or just choose to ignore it in their designs.

 

I have found an "empirical" approach works best, but it can be time consuming. Also, ensure that you look at the help sites like http://tmg.reigelridge.com/Importing.htm and http://www.tmgtips.com and the Rootsweb forum http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/TMG.

 

 

If you have the luxury of creating the GEDCOM you can experiment with the various output options.

 

Usually I import other peoples, so I get what I'm given. So I use the different import options in TMG. Sometime if I know the source program, and I have a copy, I will put it back into that database and import from that programs files. In this situation I would try and get an original program file or backup as "all" the data will be there. But it is not always better than a GEDCOM.

 

As regards memos v notes. I have always had problems importing them to memos. They often go to "a big note" for each person. I then have to manually split them, or move to the correct tag. At least the data is there and can usually be used "as is" until I have time to tidy it up.

 

There are problems going from TMG too. Many programs will not accept Witness tags (I'm not sure if TMG actually exports them?). On the Tag Type definition, you need to match the GEDCOM export type to the destination. On the export to GEDCOM, I always use max GEDCOM line length of 246 (max allowed) so there is less truncation of data when input to certain programs (e.g. FTM for certain tags).

 

If you get someone else's GEDCOM, there notes/memos may well be truncated, so you might have to ask for Journal type reports etc to complete. I noticed that when I got a GEDCOM from Tribal Pages the max note/memo seemed to be 246 chars, so all that carefully detailed text was lost.

 

I know from my experience that Genes reunited and Ancestry trees have great difficulty with notes and sources from TMG, whereas the Rootsweb Trees have no trouble at all, it seems to take anything, no matter what the format (but not witness info).

 

 

If I've got one or two facts wrong please don't berate me, I just want to show that GEDCOM 5.5 is not the "standard" we would like it to be.

 

I am surprised that a new GEDCOM standard has not been developed to cater for the recent developments in IT, and to allow for things like witnesses, partners, and I'm sure there must be many other items that could do with well thought out standards. I suppose it would take the software developers and people like Ancestry to get together.

 

Jim Orrell

Thanks for the quick reply: an email with my database is on its way.

The sex flag issue with the direct import is fixed and I can send you updated files.

 

Please send me your database so that I can test the comment/location issue.

 

You can contact me by clicking on the link below.

Jim Byram

 

%%%%%%%%%%

 

With FTM 16, you might find that the GEDCOM import does as good a job as the direct import. It's worth making the comparison.

I'm new to TMG and am experimenting with a small (4-person) FTM16 .ftw or .fbk import to TMG7.04. Using the advanced import wizard to do a direct import, the two children show a sex of "?" in the children window, even though they were properly gendered in FTM.

More important, my residence information ends up in the "memo" field (and the memo column is checked) rather than in the "location" fields as expected. In contrast, the birth and death locations are properly classified into location fields and the memo fields are empty, just as I would have expected. Same thing happens with my "education" and "burial" information from FTM, in which I have much "location" information.

I've tried adjusting the tag import procedure by ensuring that the "residence", "education", and "burial" tags are set to "Location" rather than to "Comment" or some combination of "location" and "comment", but I can't seem to populate the location fields, just the memo fields, with my FTM "Facts".

I don't see that any other FTM importers are having this problem - I wonder if I'm missing a step, or is there just going to be a lot of cleanup (distributing "memo" fragments into their proper "location" fields? My work FTM file has 1600 individuals, many with consistent location information in residence, burial, and even occupation facts.

Incidently, exporting to GEDCOM from FTM16, and then GEDCOM into TMG, seemed to work better in terms of populating the location fields and getting the genders correct, but everything I've read suggests that a direct import is better. How can I make my direct import fill the location fields?