dennis

The inclusion of unicode support is really the only additional feature I care about at this point. While I'm creating a wish list, I guess it would also be nice if things were moved to an OS independent platform (Linux and MacOS compatibility would be nice) but I don't see any of that happening soon / ever...

Thanks!

I'm currently having a problem that exhibit pictures shown within the Image window appear as thumbnails. Is there a setting for getting them to fill the Image window. Thanks!

I'm currently helping a friend with their Romanian genealogy. When I sat down to start entering data I quickly found that I couldn't use some common characters (even copying and pasting from the Character Map didn't work). Is there a way around this? TMG seems able to handle: à, á, &c. fine... but when it comes to: ş, ţ, it replaces the pasted character with the letter followed by a comma (other times it just appears as a question mark). This would be VERY confusing in a print-out, especially with places are separated by commas, i.e., Town, County, State, Country. Is there a work-around for this? Thanks. Dennis

Thanks for your comments everyone. After much gnashing of teeth, coding, and re-coding, I think I'm going to settle with... Principal: [:CR:][:CR:][:TAB:]The estate of [P] was probated <[D]> <[L]>. <In [PP] Will, [P] listed [PP] inheritors as: [WO] Heir: On [D], [R:Heir] inherited [WM] from the Will of [P1] Executor and Heir: On [D], [R:Executor and Heir] acted as Executor to the Will of [P1], inheriting [WM] Executor On [D], [R:Executor] acted as Executor to the Will of [P1] There might be better ways to do this, but I have to stop tweaking things at some point and get back to data entry! Thanks again.

Thanks for your input. I have made adjustments based on your comments. It would be nice, in future versions, if the Principal could reference the Witness Memos however. It would also be nice if people could have more than one Role in a Tag. Reason? Because sometimes people serve more than one purpose in an event! For instance, in a Will/Probate situation, a person could be both an Heir and an Executor. Both are significant roles. In the meantime I've revamped my sentences to look like this: Principal: [:CR:][:CR:][:TAB:][PP] estate was probated <[D]> <[L]>. <In [PP] Will, [P] left [M1] to [R:Heir1]><, [M2] to [R:Heir2]><, [M3] to [R:Heir3]><, [M4] to [R:Heir4]><, [M5] to [R:Heir5]><, [M6] to [R:Heir6]><, [M7] to [R:Heir7]><, [M8] to [R:Heir8]><, [M9] to [R:Heir9]><, [M10] to [R:Heir10]><, [M11] to [R:Heir11]><, [M12] to [R:Heir12]><, [M13] to [R:Heir13]><, [M14] to [R:Heir14]><, [M15] to [R:Heir15]> Witness (Role-Heir): On [D], [R:Heir1] was listed to receive [M1] by the Will of [P1] And that seems to work. It would be MUCH cleaner if I didn't have to lump everything into the Prinicpal's memo field, and instead use the individual Witness Memos but... The output looks like this: Not so bad. It would also be interest (to me, maybe others?) if a Relation variable could be added, such as [PREL] (principal relation) or [WREL] (witness relation). That way you could construct sentences that look like: [W] was the [WREL] of [P1] Or: [P1] was the [PREL] of [W] Oh well, I'm getting off-track here. Thanks for the help!

Ok. Usually I can figure these out. Not today though... I've been playing around with a Probate tag (trying to make it as complex as possible). First, I've set up 15 witness roles (i.e. Heir1 thru Heir15). The Principal sentence structure is: [PP] estate was probated <[D]> <[L]>. <In [PS] Will, [PP] left [WM1] to [R:Heir1]><, [WM2] to [R:Heir2]><, [WM3] to [R:Heir3]><, [WM4] to [R:Heir4]><, [WM5] to [R:Heir5]><, [WM6] to [R:Heir6]><, [WM7] to [R:Heir7]><, [WM8] to [R:Heir8]><, [WM9] to [R:Heir9]><, [WM10] to [R:Heir10]><, [WM11] to [R:Heir11]><, [WM12] to [R:Heir12]><, [WM13] to [R:Heir13]><, [WM14] to [R:Heir14]><, [WM15] to [R:Heir15]> While the Heir1 (and other Heirs) sentence structures are: <On [D],> [R:Heir1] was left [WM1] from the Will of [P1] This doesn't work. I've also tried: <On [D],> [R:Heir1] was left [RM:Heir1] from the Will of [P1] That doesn't work either. Any ideas?

Thanks, that seems to have worked!

I am trying to delete a very distant family (not even family really) branch of 137 people. I created a focus group of all the people, no problem. In fact, creating the focus group was easier than I thought it would be. Next, I tried to delete all the people using the focus group but it only grabbed 60 or so because of "existing relationships". Is there any way to delete all relationships within a focus group without pulling-up each individual separately? This would be a great help in trimming some of the excess out of my database. Thanks,