Michael Hannah

Another user asked about this in the forum topic Master Tag Type List. In that thread I mention two options, TMG Utility and merging. See that topic for further comments. Hope this gives you ideas,

Yes, the TMG Utility will work. TMG Utility has not (yet) been upgraded to work with Version 7, but John has been extremely generous with his work on this shareware/donorware and we hope/expect it to be updated when he gets time. In the meantime, summarizing from the TMG Utility for Version 6 Help files: Export Sentences writes all of the languages, roles, and sentences defined for all tags to a text file. The file may then be used with the TMG Utility Import Sentences function. When you Import Sentences you may select the language to import and check or uncheck the "Prompt before processing each tag" checkbox, as desired. If checked, the program will ask you to confirm the processing of each tag as it is imported, so you can import only those tags you desire. John's utility is an essential tool to do "bulk" activities upon TMG projects. It is very easy to use but very powerful so a good backup is always appropriate before using it. It even lets you run in "log only" mode so that you can see what it "would" do if you let it. Extremely useful. An alternative may be to create a new project/dataset from selections of your existing project/dataset and then merge in that special dataset with its custom tags to an existing dataset. For further information on what happens to custom tags during merging I would review Terry's Tips about Merging Projects and Data Sets Hope this gives you ideas,

Bob, I understand your "role" background from UFT, but for others that are used to TMG and its ability to use different Principal sentences based on the SEX flag, you could get what you want with just Principals. I make a point of always putting the male/husband in P1 and the female/wife in P2 so this works for me. Also, since this tag should have at least a location I would leave the [L] unconditional as a reminder. I would use M1 for the note for P1 and M2 for the note for P2, then M3 for the common ending comment, and also split the witness memo. I think these sentences will work even if I have only one Principal as long as I stick to my rule of P1 and P2. (I also included the more general use of [M1] proposed by teschek): Male: [M1], [P1F] resided in [L]. Female: [M2], [P2F] resided in [L]. resident: [WM1], [W] resided with in [L]. I chose to have multiple types of "Address" tags in the Address group, and mark the current or main (for that person) address primary, but then I do not generate Address labels. Hope this gives you ideas,

Joan, just as one data point, I have XP/Pro and am having no difficulties. Good luck. Michael

You are both right. Microsoft announced that Shift-Insert should be replaced by Ctrl-V for all applications following Windows 3.1, but then it never followed its own recommendations and still uses it and includes it in its standard help for both the OS and most MS applications. That said, my testing of Version 7 shows that Ctrl-Insert and Shift-Insert seem to work to copy/paste text, but do toggle the INS indicator on the status line. However, even though the indicator has changed state I observe that the behavior of being either in Insert or Overwrite mode does NOT change. The indicator is now wrong, but the insert mode has not changed state. At least the program behaves appropriately even if the indicators are now confusing. Michael

Leslie, I just do not understand your concern. For almost all of the TMG files the software provides a simple and standard way to let you be in complete control of where they go. When you do the software install it prompts you to tell it where to install the program files. I changed its default during the install and do not have the program files in the default C: location, and it runs fine. You can easily configure TMG to have your data files somewhere other than its default, as multiple posts here have described. And Keith mentioned a more advanced way to use the "User_data.txt" file to allow you to put almost all the rest of TMG's internal files where ever you want them. As I see it, if the "placement of the program, its files and my data is too onerous" it is only because you chose to let them stay in the default locations. And I do not find these default locations unusual as most new programs designed for Vista chose exactly equivalent default locations. What is onerous? Having to change the default? But you would have to do that for almost any modern program. What am I missing? Michael

I have multiple accounts, some with Administrative privileges and some without. What works reliably for me is to only install the program (for all users in a shared program area) using an account with Administrative privileges. I then logout and login to my normal unprivileged user account and restore the V6 project while in that account. All seems to work fine doing it that way.

Keith and Duane, Yes you can use your folder naming scheme for your user data, but TMG will insist on also having its own folder naming scheme for its own program data. With multiple different lines I am researching for various clients I have an immensely more complex folder structure than yours, and my user data is just where I want it to be. But TMG will insist on also having its own folders for its program data. The folder specified in Preferences > Program Options > General is just the default location where TMG first looks for opening projects. You can always tell it to look elsewhere. And every path you can set in Preferences > Current Project Options > Advanced can be set to a folder just about anywhere you want. And for me the best part is that these settings are Project dependent, so each project can point to a different set of folders with its own folder structure!! Since TMG lets me put my genealogy data where ever I want, having a few program files in folder locations that are fixed by the program seems a small annoyance relative to the enormous capabilities of this software package.

While I had no problems converting my projects to V7, a few people have. I don't know if this was the cause of their problems, but I would highly suggest that users run the File Maintenance sequence of "Optimize/Validate File Integrity/Optimize" on your V6 project until you get no errors before you do a backup for restoring to V7. And immediately after you restore in V7 I would do the same sequence there. It probably is not necessary, but it sure can't hurt.

Joan, I would be interested in how you might address my following concerns about using the person's Reference field for MRIN. The issue I have with using the person's Reference field (which is a field displayed with "Last edited" and "Soundex") is that there is only one field for a person. Since MRIN is for marriages, and I have a number of individuals with multiple marriages, I would want a person to be able to have multiple MRINs. The Reference field could contain multiple MRINs since you can customize it to a max length of 250 characters, but this does not fully resolve the issue. I have found no way to filter for a given value in that field, neither in a List of Persons report nor in the Project Explorer. You can sort the PE by Reference, but that doesn't help with a field containing multiple MRINs. Finally, since I often import files from GEDCOM, I generally reserve the use of the Reference field for the Ancestral File Number to aid in referring back to the GEDCOM entry. I don't currently record an MRIN in TMG, but this is an idea that I like for organizing paperwork and I also like it because I could link it to the PAF MRIN and/or the GEDCOM FAM identifier. However, I would want to be able to search for a specific MRIN and generate reports. For my purposes I would rather link the MRIN to the MARRIAGE tag itself so that it is automatically linked to both parties. That was why I offered the suggestions of the split memo field and the custom "pseudo" source. With the split memo (e.g. M4) you could generate a List of People report or filter the PE using "Marriage Group... Memo 4 Contains [?]". Of course a variation on this idea would be to have a separate custom tag in the Marriage Group named "MRIN" and have its memo contain the number. Then you could easily filter and make reports while excluding this tag from normal reports. While I don't see how to filter the PE using my suggestion of the citation Reference field in a pseudo source (e.g. source number 457), at least you could generate a List of Citations report filtered for "Source Number equals 457 AND File Reference Contains [?]". Thougts? Comments?

Virginia,I found an idea for tracking edits recorded in my notes (but have not tried it myself) of citing a special pseudo "source" that was marked excluded. If you are a "splitter" you could use a different "source" for each editing session, or a "lumper" and a single "Edit Tag" source with the date (and maybe a comment) in the CD using F3. As a "lumper" I think I would use the latter, with the ability to just keep adding to the list of dates in the CD as a running record of modifications. Either method lets you use "List of Citations" filtered for either a particular one of your many editing session "sources", or filtered for the single "source" that also contains the desired date in the CD. This would list events marked in this way as edited on that date. Hope this gives you ideas,

Hi Delia, I do not have such an event in any of my data sets, but how I would enter it would depend upon how many of such events I believed to be likely. For "one-of-a-kind" events I use a custom event with a very generic sentence: [P1] <and [P2]> [M1] <[D]> <[L]> <[M2]> With the two parts of the split memo (I use split memos a lot) you can make this sentence say just about anything you want. Of course, you could have Witnesses to the event (perhaps the unborn child, or the doctor, or ?) with a similar generic witness sentence: [W] [WM1] [P1] <and [P2]> [M1] <[D]> <[L]> <[WM2]> For your pregnancy example, if you made the parents P1 and P2, then M1="announced the coming of a son", and M2="and obtained a movie of the ultrasound". Then you might have grandma a Witness with WM1="began preparations to be a grandmother when" and WM2="by sending a movie of the ultrasound. She began knitting blue booties." You can do quite a lot with the split memos of such a generic event. If I thought there would be a lot of these pregnancy events, then I would make a custom event for just this situation. Hope this gives you ideas,

A couple of alternate ideas. You could use a split memo field on the Marriage tag and enter the MRIN in one of the memo fields. You then could have a different "language" (like Teresa's Columnar language) which would generate reports that used the MRIN but that split field was not used in "normal" reports. [search the forum for columnar language for more info.] Another option might be to cite a custom Source on each Marriage tag (possibly a source called MRIN) and enter your assigned number as the Citation Reference. Hope this gives you ideas, Michael

Sorry, but there is no defined standard variable for that as of version 6. Us users can always express a "wish" for such a variable for the future by such posts as this, but at the moment the only similar standard variable is [AO] and [AOE] for the "other" principal. However, you could create a custom tag (or customize an existing tag) and assign custom roles to the parents as witnesses in that tag, for example custom roles of FATH and MOTH. Then you could use the defined standard variables of [RA:rolename] or [RE:rolename] to get their ages in your custom sentences. This might be used to accomplish what you appear to want. Hope this gives you ideas,

I made a custom "Marr Not" tag type within the Marriage group for people who are known to have mated (since they had identified offspring and I want to show that shared parental relationship) but are not considered married in the typical sense. I defined the sentences for the various roles as follows: Role=Male (used only with P1) Male sentence: [P] [M3] [PO] Female sentence: -- Role=Female (used only with P2) Male sentence: -- Female sentence: [P] [M1] [PO] Role=Principal [P] and [PO] [M] Role=Witness [W] witnessed [WM1] of [P] I moved the standard roles Bride and Groom to the bottom of the list and do not use them. TMG requires events in the Marriage group to exist to print reports with correct birth order sorting of the offspring of the mating. If the relationship is simple and reciprocal I use the standard Principal roles for both parties and the sentence just has their names followed by a required [M] with everything I want to say about this relationship. I choose to put the male as P1 and the female as P2. If I want to say something different from each point of view then I use a split memo. [M1] will specify the relationship from the “Female” point of view with optional Date (usually a date range) and Location and [M2] as her comment. (I have the female's split memo first as I commonly know about the mother but not the father.) Then [M3] specifies the relationship from the “Male” point of view with optional Date and Location and [M4] as his comment. Note that having both [P] and [PO] non-optional automatically produces the standard "an unknown person" text if either is not specified. [WM1] describes the relationship from the Witness’ point of view, with [WM2] for added comments. Some have suggested other separate custom tag types, e.g. "Marr Coh" for known to have cohabited (lived together), and "Marr Rel" for known to have relations (sex) but not to have lived together. Most define these in the Marriage group, but you could define them in the Other group if they did not have offspring. My “lumper” preference seems served with my one "Marr Not" tag type in the Marriage group and using the memo to describe the nature of this relationship. However, having separate custom tag types may be of value for selecting which will print. Instead of separate tag types one could define appropriate roles for various specific relationships and associated different predefined sentences all in a similar single custom tag type. Hope this gives you ideas,

Don't forget my suggestion of creating a location "pseudo" person. This is the simplest way that I have discovered to document within TMG multiple names of a location. And if you want a given event to reference the "standard" location, the location "pseudo" person can be linked as a Witness with an appropriate role using an appropriate NameVar of that "person".

I agree that this is an issue. My workaround is as follows (but I only use it occasionally and only for those places that have greatly changed over time). I use as the place name for a tag whatever the place was called in the source citation that provided the evidence for this tag. If I know that this place name was only in use during a specific period and not afterwards, I use the date range in the Master Place List so that it prompts me if I use it outside that date range. My real workaround involves the use of a "pseudo" location person. A single location person could be used to link together multiple “place entries” in the Master Place List that actually referred to the same location by using multiple Name-Var tags with possible date ranges to reflect when the location was known by each name. Name indices would link all these locations to this one “person”. The primary name could be the Name-Var that is the “current” name, or could be a name identifying the latitude and longitude. A tag associated with a "real" person would have the actual name of the location as of the time of the event entered as a place from the Master Place List, but the location “person” could be linked as a witness, either using the actual Name-Var for that time or the “current” name with a possible witness sentence of “This location is currently named [W]”. If a larger area was identified by a single name for a period of time and then subdivided, the larger area “person” could be the “mother” of the multiple subdivided “daughters” who were created/born at the time of the subdivision. (I choose to make all location "pseudo" people female.) You can also have a custom tag in the Birth group for the creation or first settlement of this location. Various tags are possible to associate with a location, and various reports are now possible for these location "people". I define the Given name as the specific subdivision/location (e.g. “Adams Township”) and the Surname as the complete higher level locale, comma separated, beginning with smallest (e.g. “Washington County, Ohio”). I choose to place the country in the Suffix so I can define whether to output it by selecting an alternate name style. My two location name styles (one with country in the output, one without) display these names in picklists with the name parts separated by colons since the surname can have internal commas. I also define custom labels in the name style (i.e. [Location], [Locale], [Country]) for the name parts as a data entry aid. Hope this gives you ideas.

Sorry, but I can't think of a way to do it this time. Maybe someone else will have an idea. I can suggest something for next time (but that doesn't help for this reunion): You could create a custom Flag (maybe called Reunion) and set everyone whose information you shared at the Reunion to 'Y'. Now after the reunion, any time you make a change to something in a person (have the discipline to) change the flag to 'N' so you will know that there is new information to report at the next reunion. Hope this gives you ideas,

I changed the sentences of this standard tag to a more general purpose tag, and use it instead of also using the standard Graduation tag. [M1] defines what happened (“graduated from high school”), [M2] optionally precedes the location in the sentence since I prefer the flexibility of sometimes putting the name of the school here rather than as part of a location in the Master Place List, and [M3] has optional comments. Principal: "[P] [M1]." Witness: "[W] witnessed [P] [M1]." Hope this gives you ideas,

I use both of the two standard tags, but have customized both to deal with possible children or any others that came as a group. I also changed the sentences of the standard Immigratn tag to make the Date and the arrival Location non-optional for the immigration so if you don't include it you get the “unknown” phrases. I use the Principal role “Head” for P1, and do not use P2, and the Witness role “immigree” for all others immigrating with the “Head” as a group. [P]<, listed as [M1],> immigrated to [L] [D]< from [M2]>< along with [R:immigree]>.< [M3]> The split tag memo [M1] optionally provides the name of the Head as listed in the immigration documentation in case it is different than any Name-Var defined for this person, [M2] optionally specifies the claimed departure location, and [M3] has optional comments. My sentence for the Witness role “immigree” is: [W]<, listed as [WM1],>< as a [WM2]> led by [P1] immigrated to [L] [D]< from [M2]>.< [WM3]> The split Witness memo [WM1] optionally provides the listed name of this immigree, [WM2] the listed relationship to the Head (e.g. “son”), and [WM3] has optional comments. The listed departure location from the main split memo [M2] is included in the immigree sentence if it has been entered. If you create ship “pseudo” people in your dataset, you could also add the ship as a witness with custom role of “ship” and an appropriate sentence. I changed the sentences of the standard tag Emigration in a similar manner to require the Date and the Location from which the emigration is taking place, with equivalent “emigrated from”sentences and the Witness role “emigree”, Hope this gives you ideas.

You might look at my custom and very generic Education tag. I posted it in the new forum that discusses custom tags. Hope this gives you ideas,

It seems that recording Census data gives rise to the greatest variety of custom tags and sentences. Here is my main custom "CensusEnum" tag and its sentences which I use in place of the standard Census tag. I have an equivalent CensusX tag for recording index and soundex data. I have CensusFind and CensusXFind to indicate that I need to locate census data, and CensusNil and CensusXNil to record what I looked for but did not find. These tags and sentences are similar to this main enumeration tag. Hope this gives you ideas. Tag Overview I prefer to have the Head of Household as P1 with their unique data in the split main memo. I put names as recorded in the census as one of the parts of their split memo, not as a NameVar tag. All members of the household have one of the three enumeration roles “spouse”, “child”, or “Witness” (or the equivalent conclusiion roles "spouseAssumed", "childAssumed", "assumed") to this one tag with their data and their relationship to the HOH in their separate witness memos. The full actual census record is attached as an Exhibit. P2 is required to link to a "pseudo" census person. I do not use separate tags for each year as I use [P2F] for the year in the sentences, and most variable information is in the memos not the sentences. This is usually the only census tag I include in normal narratives. I cannot include the term “child” or “children” in the parents' sentences since TMG (currently?) provides no way to know if there are multiple people assigned to a (child) role, so I use the generic term “offspring”, and the sentences assume that individuals assigned the role “child” are offspring of both the head and the spouse. These sentences use the role variables (including [R:Witness] ) when I want a specific group, and [WO] when I want all witnesses regardless of role. I prefer to have the details of the focus person only print with that person and only identify the spouse and offspring with their specific roles. The nature/relationship of the other members of the household, and the details of all other members, are in their own narratives via their witness memos. Example narrative output might be: (two different years as HOH, one as a Witness) Joe Smith was enumerated in the 1880 Census in Chicago, Illinois, on 3 Jun 1880 as head of household with his wife Mrs. Mary Smith and his offspring Robert Smith, Mary Sue Smith, and George Smith, details: W, M, 29, Tanning, 3 months unemployed, born- Ohio, parents born- Ohio. His household also included Mrs. Mary Jane Roe. Emil Ring and Albert B. Conger were included in the household and listed as lodgers. Joseph J. Smith was enumerated in the 1900 Census in Chicago, Illinois, on 11 Jun 1900 as head of household with his wife Mrs. Mary Smith and his offspring George Smith, Louise Smith, and Susan Smith, details: White, Male, age 48 born Oct 1863 in Ohio, married 23 years, father born- Ohio, mother born- Ohio, occ- Bar Tender, rents house. 24 year-old Mary Flannigan was also enumerated with the household as a servant. The 1910 Census in Chicago, Illinios, enumerated J. J. Smith as a father-in-law in the household of Robert P. Jones and Mrs. Mary Sue Jones, details: 59, M, W, widow, b- Ohio, occupation- county surveyor. The tag elements have the following data: P1 -- Head of household, assigned the role “Head” P2 -- Census "pseudo" person identifying this census date and location, assigned the role “Extract”” since I either have a transcription or image for this household attached as an exhibit. These "people" have a naming convention of the Given name identifying the kind of census data, including the year, and use the Given name sentence variables (e.g. [P2G] for what it is, and [P2F] to get the year) of this pseudo person in sentences. The Surname identifies the full location covered by this data, comma separated, beginning with country down to the location detail of this data. I can use Surname name variable in sentences for large to small, and the normal location sentence variables for small to large. Finally, the suffix identifies the range covered by this type of census data. With Given name beginning with the year, and Surname the ordered location from largest to smallest, reports of these "people" can be sorted either by year (by Given name) or by location (by Surname). Example: Given="1920 Census" Surname="USA, Ohio, Washington County, Adams Township" Suffix="EDs 103-105" Date -- Only entered if you have an exact actual enumeration date, otherwise left blank Sort Date -- If no actual date then I use “Jun” of census year because of the sort dates I use for the other types of census tags Location -- as specified in the census, detail depends on how full you want your Master Place List to be, maybe street address? I choose to lump for the Place List and show location details like the street address only in the Citation Detail. Main memo -- name of head recorded in census||phrase of the head’s specific census data||sentence of other information to be included only with the head, such as a list of others enumerated but not linked as witnesses||sentence to be appended with head and all Witnesses spouse role Witness memo -- name recorded in census||phrase of the spouse’s specific census data||optional information about the spouse to follow the word ‘ as ’||sentence of extra information about this spouse of the head of household. The term “wife” or “husband” is generated automatically in the sentence based on the SEX flag of this witness. child role Witness memo -- name recorded in census||phrase of this child’s specific census data||required text about the child to follow the word ‘ as ’||sentence of extra information about this child of the head of household. The text about the child (following the word "as") is usually “ a son ” or “ a daughter ” as enumerated (which sometimes proves to be in error and is entered “ a daughter [sic] ”). generic Witness role memo -- name recorded in census||phrase of this person’s specific census data||relationship of this witness to the head to follow the word ‘ as ’||sentence of extra information about this witness. Entering relationship text in the memo precludes the need for separate roles/tags, example text: “ his mother-in-law ”, “ her uncle ”, etc. spouseAssumed role Witness memo -- name recorded in census, or just ‘ him ’ or ‘ her ’ if unnamed||phrase of the spouse’s specific census data||phrase of the census data that makes you think this is the spouse to follow the word ‘ as ’||sentence of extra information about this spouse. The term “presumed wife” or “presumed husband” will be based on the SEX flag of this witness. For the relationship data enter a phrase like “ one of the five unspecified family members ” to show count, “ the female 20 to 30 ” to show age category, etc. There will usually be either [WM2] or [WM3] but not both. childAssumed role Witness memo -- name recorded in census, or just ‘ him ’ or ‘ her ’ or ‘ a child ’ if unnamed||phrase of this child’s specific census data||phrase of the census data that makes you think this is a child of the head to follow the word ‘ as ’||sentence of extra information about this presumed child of the head of household. In this relationship portion of the memo enter a phrase like “ one of the five unspecified family members ” to show count, “ one of the 3 females under age 5 ” to show age category, etc. There will usually be either [WM2] or [WM3] but not both. assumed role Witness memo -- name recorded in census, or just ‘ him ’ or ‘ her ’ if unnamed||phrase of this person’s specific census data||phrase of the census data that makes you think this person is enumerated in this household to follow the word ‘ as ’||sentence of extra information about this witness. In this relationship portion of the memo enter a phrase which will follow the word “ as ”, e.g. “ one of the five unspecified family members ” to show count, “ one of the 3 females under age 5 ” to show age category, etc. There will usually be either [WM2] or [WM3] but not both. Witness Roles: spouse or child or Witness Used for all people named and enumerated with this Head of Household (could use picklist to select all at once then go back and fill in their memos and set their roles). The role “child” is for children of both this head and this spouse, otherwise use “Witness” with appropriate text. For sentences to work, link using the Name-Marr for any women married at this time and enumerated with their married name. If person is only implied by the data (e.g. U.S. census records prior to 1850), use one of the appropriate “assumed” roles instead. childAssumed or spouseAssumed or assumed For census enumerations where some aspect of the people in the household is described, but they are not named (e.g. 3 males under age 5), or where they are named but the relationship is not specified (possibly left blank), these custom witness roles are used to link those individuals you believe are the ones enumerated in this household and/or you assume to have these relationships. The role “childAssumed” is for children of both this head and this spouse, otherwise use “assumed” with appropriate text. Head (P1) sentences Male: [M1] was enumerated in the [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> as head of household< with his wife [R:spouse]>< with [R:spouseAssumed] who is presumed to be his wife>< and his offspring [R:child]>< and his presumed offspring [R:childAssumed]><, details: [M2]>.< His household also included [R:Witness].>< His household is also assumed to include [R:assumed].>< [M3].>< [M4]> Female: [M1] was enumerated in the [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> as head of household< with her husband [R:spouse]>< with [R:spouseAssumed] who is presumed to be her husband>< and her offspring [R:child]>< and her presumed offspring [R:childAssumed]><, details: [M2]>.< Her household also included [R:Witness].>< Her household is also assumed to include [R:assumed].>< [M3].>< [M4]> Extract (P2) sentence [:CR:][:CR:][BOLD:][P2F] Census Enumeration[:BOLD] of the household of [BOLD:][M1][:BOLD] in [L]< on [D]> linked to [P1]< and to [WO]> spouse role sentences Male: The [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> enumerated [WM1] in [P1S] household as her husband< as [WM3]><, details: [WM2]><. [WM4]><. [M4]> Female: The [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> enumerated [WM1] in [P1S] household as his wife< as [WM3]><, details: [WM2]><. [WM4]><. [M4]> child role sentence The [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> enumerated [WM1] as [WM3] in the household of [P1]< and [R:spouse]><, details: [WM2]>.< [WM4].>< [M4]> generic Witness role sentence The [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> enumerated [WM1]< as [WM3]> in the household of [P1]< and [R:spouse]><, details: [WM2]>.< [WM4].>< [M4]> spouseAssumed role sentences Male: The [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> enumerated [WM1] in [P1S] household, presumably her husband<, as [WM3]><, details: [WM2]><. [WM4]><. [M4]> Female: The [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> enumerated [WM1] in [P1S] household, presumably his wife<, as [WM3]><, details: [WM2]><. [WM4]><. [M4]> childAssumed role sentence The [P2G] in [L]< on [D]> enumerated [WM1] presumably as a child of head of household [P1]< and spouse [R:spouse]> < as [WM3]><, details: [WM2]><. [WM4]><. [M4]> assumed role sentence [W] is assumed to be [WM1] who was enumerated< on [D]> in the [P2G] in [L]< as [WM3]> in the household of [P1]< and [R:spouse]><, details: [WM2]><. [WM4]><. [M4]>

I can understand the desire for this enhancement, but I would suggest that the only meaningful enhancement was a special toggle that would simply turn on/off the automatic updating of the "Last edited" information. Not something I can currently think of using, but at least that would provide total control. As two possible customizations, have you thought about both a custom flag and/or a custom tag. I have a custom flag (actually a couple) that I use for editing "work in progress". I can set values of "E=needs to be edited", "P=partially complete, in progress" and "Y=yep this person has been edited", or other values like "N=not really edited" or "R=really edited, the edit date is for real". I have also seen suggestions of a custom tag in the Other group for every person, called "Last edited" or other similar names. The date of this tag can then be set manually to whatever you wish with the memo describing the last thing you edited, and you can deselect the tag from output reports. You can easily give everyone such a tag with the TMG utility. It is added work to manually change the date of such a tag yourself, but at least TMG does have the flexibility of a "work-around" way to accomplish this. Whether this added work is worth it is a matter of how important such information is to you. Hope this gives you ideas,

The filter mentioned will only look for Birth tags. In case you have some people who only have Baptism tags in the Birth group and do not have Birth tags, it would be more complete if you changed the filter line: Tag Type... Label = BIRTH AND to: Tag Type Group is BIRTH AND Since TMG puts the standard Baptism tag in the Birth group, and uses that date for birth in the absence of a Birth tag, you might have some people with only that data. Otherwise, with the previous filter you might miss these people. You might also check out John Cardinal's "On this day" utility that prints events associated with a given date. www.johncardinal.com/otd/ There might be ways to use his utility to produce reports that may interest you.

To me one of the best characteristics of TMG is its ability to be customized to work "My Way" . Those who want to "lump" into a few source types can, and those who want to "split" into multiple source types can . What seems to be the issue is what is provided as source types "by default" for a project or dataset, i.e. you at least start out by having this list of source types in your Master Source List (MSL) that are not currently used or needed in your dataset, or are not how you would want them. My wish is to have NO source types by default in a brand new dataset, but to have an easy facility to import pre-defined source types into the MSL from a file. That way the possibly thousands of Mills source types, or the relatively few Lackey source types, could be provided in files, and could allow you to scroll through them to select those that you wished to import into this dataset. You would then even be able to choose some from one type and some from the other! With a matching easy way to export your own customized source types you could maintain your own "master" list for multiple datasets you have, and easily share with other users. It would even provide a way for authors like Mills and Lackey to develop and provide their own "official" TMG examples of their source types. Anyone share my wish?