LornaHenderson
-
Content count
832 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by LornaHenderson
-
-
The option pertains to the report output of the LOP. It was never intended to be used in the manner in which you are trying to use it.The point of the LOP use to copy people to a new project or data set is to copy the data for those persons in a full and complete manner.
Historically, in TMG, GEDCOM export is just another report and has the excluded/sensitive options just like any other report.
Ta Jim, I sort of expected that might be the case, but I had to ask <g>
-
I've just exported a large chunk of my data for a fellow researcher using the LOP export to new project from a focus group.
On the Miscellaneous tab I unchecked the show excluded & sensitive data, hoping that this would therefore exclude any sensitive data from the export.
It didn't.
At least I can find some sensitive data in my resultant dataset by searching for {|} in a memo.
Reading the help files I can see that excluded data wll be excluded from a gedcom export, and by association I assumed, also a new project.
The sensitive data comments don't make such a claim but I should certainly hope the option on the output tab would be honoured.
In this particular case I trust implicitly the recipient of my db, or I wouldn't even be contemplating such an export, so it isn't a great problem, I was just being cautious and checking what happened.
Can someone please comment as to whether or not the miscellaneous tab under the LOP report options about showing excluded/sensitive data should be honoured when creating secondary outputs?
-
Ahh, thanks Robin. I understand why now, at least. I often forgot to turn my external drive on before starting the backup, and it never crashed when it couldn't find it for me, just nicely told me I was an idiot. All I had to do was untick the generate name automatically, and change the drive letter.
Oh well, I've reset my preferences to what my computer currently thinks the drive is.
-
Just a comment that the change to the backup process in 6.09 doesn't suit this user.
I generally backup to an external hard drive, which for reasons I've never made time to figure out, changes itself from J:\ to i:\ seemingly at random.
Up to 6.08 I could set the drive in preferences to J: eg, and when I ran the back up with "generate name automatically" set, if the drive wasn't found, all I had to do was change the J to I or whatever, leaving the path the same.
With 6.09, if the drive is not available it now reverts to the c:\ and loses all the directory structure, so I have to renavigate thru all the darn directories to get it back to where I want. And to add insult to injury, even though I cancelled when I found this out, it was too late, it had already overwritten the path to c:\ on me.
Other than always leaving the external drive on, and therefore presumably unchanging in its drive mapping, does anyone have any suggestions to overcome this?
Including getting TMG to reverse this "helpful" change?
-
I am having difficulty entering data in the tag areas...
I have looked at the help file but I can't understand it.
Junec,
Take a look at
http://www.whollygenes.com/forums201/index.php?showforum=41
and you should find heaps of info that will help you get started.
I'd recommend Terry's tips as a starting point.
-
I have added a flag, called related to me. At the moment the standard value is ?. I have set up a focus group for these people, and want to change all of the values of this focus group to be Y, is there a easy way instead of doing one by one....
Hi,
Investigate the options under the List of People report, Secondary output tab.
Ust the focus group as the input, and put the flag to be set in the secondary output.
All perfectly standard TMG
-
Just reporting that it's now 30 April, I'm trying to update my web pages, and I noticed that the #&(*&(% citation has yet again disappeared.
I've been back thru the backups I've taken between the above 5th April and now.
The citation is still there on an 8th april full backup, and on the 12th April cycling backup, but gone by the 17th's cycling backup.
Running a report on the 17th file for all those people with a last edit date after 12 Apr showed 146 people, none of whom are the id affected.
I cannot think of a single thing out of the ordinary about these people, or the time period concerned.
The backups concerned are 11meg each but if anyone wants them to see if any clues can be spotted, please let me know, I've earmarked them not to be overwritten.
-
I thought I was imagining this, but have been forced to believe that a citation on one of my tags keeps disappearing on me.
I have a custom History tag Hist-Memo, in the History group. (Normally I would have created a role on the existing tag for a changed sentence, but you can't do that for History ones)
A while ago I noticed the citation was missing and put it back, thinking I'd just not entered it, although I can remember searching for the source, and I did think this was highly unlikely.
After putting it back, I monitiored it for a while, thru assorted VFI, optimise routines etc, and it stayed put. Then I forgot about it.
Last night I regenerated my pages, and it was gone again. So I put it back, ran VFI (no problems found) and Optimise (heaps of space reclaimed), and it is still there - again.
It shows up on the web against my Honor DAWE, so I know it was there last time I posted my web pages (22nd March).
Of course, I've absolutely no way of knowing what I may have done to trigger this, but will keep monitoring it.
-
Does anyone have any books or websites that might help me before I convince myself to put off entering my sources again.
Please please DON'T put off entering sources, you will regret it later.
Try
http://tmg.reigelridge.com/index.htm
The "unknown"s appearing are because your templates have some data or other missing and the output template hasn't got conditional markers < ... > around the elements concerned.
Read Terry's tips above, and come back to the TMG list (see
http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/TMG.html
on how to subscribe)
with any questions. Lots of helpful people out there.
-
Slightly different twist this time, didn't even get a prompt to add marriage,....No prompts for anything about marriage of the new parents.
v6.08
what I think I did this time.
I'd just added a census tag to a person, putting him as a son (Witness) of a newly added person (supposedly his mother) but working from his person view.
ie I'd shifted him from principal to witness and added the mother (now the principal) as a new person.
After F9ing the census tag I opened his Mother relationship tag and keyed in her id.
moused into the relationship memo and entered some text, then f9'd to close the relationship tag.
Previously he only had a father, no mother.
After adding this mother, who at this stage DID have his same surname, I was not prompted to add marriage for parents (and yes my preferences are set to prompt for adding marriage to parents).
-
The vanishing names from the PE is something that sometimed happened in earlier versions, but this is my first 6.08 instance.
See attached for example.
What I've not seen before is the addition of an extra line to the PE saying "unknown", which, when clicked takes you to a completely blank Person View
Couldn't reproduce either, so FYI only.
-
See attached doc for screen shots of a mystery character introduced into the relationship memo when I connected a couple of daughters up to their mother.
What I think I did:
with dtr in PV
double clicked on "mother" slot
keyed in person id of required mother
F9 to save and close
Y to continue without adding citation
What I definitely didn't do, go anywhere near the relationship memo field.
-
Every time that you run VFI, follow VFI by running optimize. ..Thanks for posting that Jim, I too was getting the above
107Operator/operand type mismatch. 8028 FIXORIGTYPE2
96Nesting error. 8037 FIXORIGTYPE2
which I had to use Check for an update to escape from as VFI froze.
Running optimise and then VFI, did work, no problems found.
-
.. There is only one name tag.Hi,
Are you absolutely sure that in the Person View, there isn't a Name-Var tag showing down with all the other birth/death etc tags?
The primary name tag doesn't show up down there, only as the Name in the box top left.
-
..FHELSS75 (surrounded by <>)Hi David,
You're missing a font on your computer.
There should be several messages on the TMG list about where to get it back from.
Try a search of the mailing list archives at
-
I've created a focus group of selected descendants for a chart I want to send to someone.
Tried using List of People report using current focus group, with secondary output to a new project (overwriting an existing, but empty, one (but I got the same error message when I tried creating new project instead of using List of People).
Ignore seems to loop.
Abort brought me back to my report definition screen, but it was frozen, had to check for update to get out of TMG but that left me with an error message
unknown member ROTOOLBARMAN
which I had to use task manager to clear.
Addenda:
Retrying this after a VFI and optimize made the error go away.
-
The thought that sprung to my mind was what version are you using?
And, if it is an earlier than 6.07, do you use function keys to open the memo before pasting?
Some earlier versions had issues about text not being saved if you hadn't clicked in the memo first before using something like an F7 paste F9 sequence.
Not a problem in the current version though.
-
I've replicated the wrong number issue and will report it. My guess it's displaying an "internal" number and not the one users see. The difference I'd think is missing sources, or deleted sources, or something of the kind.Ta Terry,
glad I wasn't completely missing the plot, just rather unobservant as to the abbreviations on my source, and rather fixated on the numbers.
I have heaps of gaps in my source numbering, (years of tidy up behind me, and ahead) so yes it is highly likely to be an internal number, lower than the actual visible number.
That source was probably the only one in my db that had a source of a source, I've never really noticed it or used it, and didn't really read the heading of the box!!
-
Lorna,Did you look at source #1063 - Peter & Jill Billing email "EM METTERS, Devon: ex P & J Billing"...?
On the Attachments tab of the source definition, in the lower half "Sources of this Souce," you should see a citation to source # 2019 - Bere Ferrers: BAP
Just delete that citation.
Looked there, nothing listed at all.
On the attachments tab for 1063 the only entry is the repository
2019 has nothing on that screen either.
However, I've just noticed that source 1063 isn't "Metters, Devon" at all so no wonder I've not spotted it.
I'm sure I've NOT renumbered it.
Searching for METTERS brought up source 1362, which does, indeed have 2019 as a source of a source.
I just reran the list of citations to check it did indeed say 1063, it does (but wont next time as it is now gone).
So I guess I've solved one problem and raised another, why on earth does the list of citations report show the wrong number?
Thanks for all your help
-
Jim is exactly right - you have this source cited as the "Source of this Source" in Source #1063.Thanks all, but..
I thought it might be something like that, but I'm darned if I can spot it.
the two sources are completely separate logically, and appear to have absolutely nothing connecting them visible
I can't even spot how I can input/update/change a source of a source - and help didn't help
Running a list of sources report, filtered by source number, separately for both numbers just showed up a one line report showing number, surety, abbreviation
Couldn't spot anything in the filters available that would let me find a source of a source either.
-
yep.
zilch shows up.
I'm beginning to think that the 1 citation is a figment of TMG's imagination, and I should just delete the damn thing anyway, but I got stubborn as to why and where.
Ta for trying
-
As per my email on the list, attached are some screen shots of my attempts to find the remaining reference to a source I'm tyring to delete.
List of events filtered for citations to source x says there aren't any qualifying events.
List of citations report gives a result of one, and variable output depending on format, screen and PDF one outpuf, rtf or word giving a conversion error.
I need to know where it thinks it is being used so I can check my data and either fix it to another source or delete the citation, and then delete the source
Help!
-
Further to Teresa's comment on the TMG list, attached is a file of snapshots where I could make this happen each time.
Basically, unfiltered, accented PE
expand a family
see (sp) next to spouse
click on child
change dth date
PE display updates, with (sp) next to spouse gone.
It can be brought back by collapsing and expanding the family if you really want to see it.
Hardly a major matter, but for curiousity sake, my evidence is attached.
-
LornaYou will not get a prompt for a married name is a name tag already exists for that surname.
Fine, but in this case even the "do I want to add a marriage" (or whatever the prompt is) for the parents was missing.
Not sure I totally agree with the above though. What if you always want Name-Marr tags? I didn't have one of those at the point this occurred.
I really am treating it as just one of those things and continuing, but logging it in the hope it helps someone eliminate a bug, or realise that one might exist and therefore take care when adding parents.
awol citation on history tag
in Older Products and Versions
Posted · Report reply
Well, I put the citation back on the 30th April, have just regenerated my web pages and remembered to check if it was still there. No, it's gone again.
A VFI run earlier today showed no problems found. Haven't time just now to go back through the backups and find when it vanished, but I remember checking it was still there after I upgraded to 6.09