jim.orrell

- I've just installed TMG 7.4 on win7, so, as expected, I can't print report to *.rtf etc. - Have managed to install the PDF printer so I can at least get reports to a PDF file. But I'm having a problem with: Individual Report > Options > Sources. For this report I had set up - Endnotes + Unique - Show excluded citations - Include name sources - Include relationship sources - Disable "ibid. For *.rtf file output on XP this gave me a list of sources as endnotes at the end of the document. But when I run this to PDF output (both xp and win7), all the superscript "source numbers" are shown in the body of the text, but there is no endnote list at the end. Perhaps I'm missing something. Jim Orrell P.S. I would normally send this sort of query to the Rootsweb forum, but my mails do not seem to be getting through, I tried 3 different email addresses and no rejection email from Rootsweb.

Well, whad da ya know! Thanks Terry, I've been scatching my head over that. You'd think after all the years I've been using TMG I'd have come accross it before. I had a suspicion from the TMG help, but your response makes it make sense now. Just shows I'm an MSword manipulating man and I'm lost without those *rtf files! Jim O

I gave up on the check for update. As an aside I also replaced Comodo, as it seems to slow things down on win7. However, I still had problems downloading TMG 7.4. via “filekicker” I got 3 different file sizes, the first 2 failing. So it still seems a bit dodgy to me. So thanks for the suggestion. I note for many software updates it is the norm to download the whole program. Might be easier in the long run. Jim Orrell

OK, got new laptop win7 64bit and I have installied TMG v7.3 (I had v 7.3 downloaded and the 7.4 download gave problems with Comodo). So I thought I would install 7.3 and update to 7.4. I had problems with the update as described above, so followed the actions above: i.e. If you are running 'Check for an update' and you get the messagebox saying that no application is associated... Do the following work-around. 1) Right-click on the shortcut that you use to run TMG7. 2) Click 'Run as Administrator'. 3) If the unlock screen opens, click [Close]. 4) When the Welcome window opens, click [Exit] or When the program starts, exit the program. 5) Now start TMG normally and run 'Check for an update'. OK, I then got much further to the “current file downloading” box, but then got box with “Install Could not communicate to the network server, error 0. File not completely downloaded”. Is this a different problem, or should it be fixed now? Jim Orrell

Terry, In previous response you said "- There is at least one solution. It requires you to have a second drive defined in Windows 7 - say D:\ - and put your exhibits (and optionally the project) on that. Then, in XP Mode, map that shared drive so it has the same drive letter. Now the path will read the same in both machines, and the exhibits are accessible without issue." I have always made it my practice to keep programs etc on my C: drive and as much "data" as possible on another drive or partition E: . (Various reasons, image backup size and restore, data portability/backup, speed if second drive, etc). I do the same with TMG. This includes my projects, and anything else I can redirect there. If this practice was used with your method above, would this not negate the need to copy projects etc. Likewise with exhibits, but that is not something I use yet. Jim O

Terry, Many thanks for that informative "article", I've only just had time to study it. I must have missed it on Rootsweb, or thought by the time I was looking at a new Laptop, the report problem would be fixed. But as you say, it might not just be TMG that one temporarily needs XP for. So, simplest and cheapest option seems to be to keep an XP machine (preferably networked), and run TMG reports from that on the files on the Win7 machine (Ideally networked, or copy to USB drive). The more expensive and messier way, and possibly slower on a laptop, is to buy Professional, Ultimate, or Enterprise Windows 7. I'll have to check out what benefits (or downside) there are for a Home user in any of those Op systems. Jim O

I did come accross an article about downloading a free "Windows XP mode" for windows 7 (I suspect a virtual window). Has anyone tested this with reports on 32 or 64 bit machines?

I've recently been trying to create a List of Events report that has memos with a length of more than 300 chars. <> 1. My preference was for a spreadsheet, primarily as it would make formatting easier, but the TMG output only sends about 250 chars max for each cell, (this is for both excel v5 and CSV files). I can understand excel v5, as I think that had a max of about 256 chars per cell. However, there should be no need to restrict a CSV file. I assume this also goes back to the time when the standard was for just 256 chars / cell. I get the same problem with a tab delimited text file. %% I would like to raise this as a bug (or at least should be fixed for v8) in that there is no longer a need to restrict to 256 chars for EXCEL, CSV or delimited files. <> 2. Next option was to a text file (not as useful without the above delimiters). Same problem of about 256 chars with the added problem of end of lines being inserted at position 107. This I can only assume is a reflection to very distant times (like 1970 mainframes; I knew them well) when most files were of FB format (fixed block). %% Is there a way to alter the line length? Otherwise I would like to raise a bug for this (or at least should be fixed for v8). Is there a workaround for either of the above, particularly point 1. For point 2 I have a workaround with producing the output to an *.RTF file with monospace font of Courier new. However, the lack of some sort of delimiter makes formatting (e.g. Word macros) very difficult. Jim Orrell

I was a bit worried I did not originally get a response to this, so thanks Jim B for requesting an "official" solution. Although I'm assured there is an official feature request/ bug list or whatever, it's a pity we can't see it! Anyway in the meantime I have another workaround to help deliniate output to an *.RTF file. If you look at this thread on Rootsweb, you should be able to apply the same principles. Subject: [TMG] List of People Hyphen http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/r...0-02/1265581708 Jim O

I think Suppress living details does not exclude the living, just their details. My method for this is to: - ensure you have your flags set correctly for the Living Flag. - run a filter to exclude living on project explorer - delete all from Focus group - R mouse, copy all copy to Focus group - run GEDCOM export using the current focus group. As long as your dates are set correctly, many upload sites will exclude the living for you, but some like GRU are too draconian for me (120 years), so I use the above method instead Re above method, you can also set flags for others you don't want in your output. There should be an easier way, if anyone knows please let me know!

Jim - Thanks for the info on the "official wish list", a pity it's not made public. I understand "in cell" editing to be able to edit/update displayed text (especially if it relates directly to a cell in the underlying database) without opening the complete record. E.G. with the PERSON tag list, to amend the date, or address or memo details without opening the whole record. Or to do similar from the Master Event List. This becomes more useful if more columns/cells of data are viewable. Michael - Thanks for your usual calming influence, but it's nice to know we are passionate about our software. There are only a few topics which seem to "light the blue touch paper". Jim Orrell

Why do we choose TMG? Because it is the best for our needs, or perhaps it compliments other genealogy programs we use. For me it mostly boils down to a flexible database that stores my info better than other programs combined with a way to filter and manipulate that data to produce output that is useful. I think it is easy, a bit like buying say a car, to be very defensive about the product one has chosen. But the advantage of software over a car is that is has great potential to be improved. TMG might be the best out there for my needs, but it could take an awful lot of improvement. Firstly, and to my mind most importantly, if a development team are serious about what their users want, they have an official "wish list", I and many others have asked for this. If it is there will someone please direct me to it? For me, and it might not be for others, TMGs major failings are: <> the speed of data entry compared to any other program on my PC (I suspect this is the underlying database). <> no "in cell" editing. <> lack of UNICODE - I don't need it now, but I'm sure I will in the future. <> a more flexible GEDCOM output (including incorporating Witness data as say an event tag, GEDCOM geared up for other databases). I hope you don't think this is "off topic", but I think the original query is about communicationg with the genealogical world outside of TMG and WGs "perceived" attitude to it and updates in general.

I like the idea very much, the more communication/ ability to share the better. At first site this sounds very complicated and harks back to the GEDCOM/ GENBRIDGE sharing of data discussions. However, if products like Legacy and Rootsmagic can do it, why not TMG? Or is TMG so different in structure it is not possible?

This previous thread might help 21 Feb 2009, 09:12 PM How to put children with their mothers in d'Aboville narrative report?, How to put children with their mothers in d'Aboville narrative rep http://www.whollygenes.com/forums201/index...&hl=journal Jim Orrell

I have created a PRIVACY at all costs flag and include such people there. I too have a branch that wish to keep even GGrandparents private (although anyone could easily get the info!). So I use this PRIVACY flag together with the LIVING flag to add (or not add) people to the Focus group via a filter on the Project Explorer. I then use the Focus group for anything I send out to "the world", mostly GEDCOM to things like Rootsweb trees, or to other people who I am not sure of. A bit messy, but once you realise some people value their family privacy more than others, it's the only way to keep the peace.

Fred, This Dual Monitor issue used to drive me mad, I had similar problems, particularly with Outlook, and different programs seem to react differently. I then discovered this on a forum somewhere which seems to work in most instances (XP still for me). - open your program, ensure it is NOT maximised - drag it to the screen you want it on. - close program (windows only seems to save the last "screen" when NOT maximised) - open program again, it should open in last closed NOT maximised screen. - if you want your program maximised, now is the time to do it. - close program again - open program again and its window should now start in the last NOT maximised screen, with the last maximised or NOT maximised setup. Hope my extended instructions make sense, but there seems to be 2 principles. 1. windows only seems to save the last "screen" when NOT maximised. 2. windows will always remember the last Maximised or NOT Maximised setting. Despite this some programs will not work on second screen (my old version of ABBYY screenshot reader), and some will not drag to the second screen (I think Video Studio). It's simple when you've been shown it, and it's easy to see how you can upset it by accident. You would think there was a setting. No idea if it is easier for Windows 7. Jim Orrell

Liz, I use Individual Detail for this. I think the only thing missing is Siblings. If you wanted them too, just run it for a focus group using a parent as the start point. Again embed the memos, all tags etc. Jim

Christian, This has been asked for before, certainly by me. In order to facilitate this I export a GEDCOM from TMG with just the people I want (e.g. like your focus group suggestion) and the relevant tag info. I then input that into FTM 2006 and use the All-in-one tree there. It’s a bit fiddly, (e.g. you can only save 1 setup, so you have to import a "no people" master project before you import the GEDCOM), also if you get too many people in it, it still works, but the odd letter gets truncated (known bug). But the output is a very neat PDF text searchable file (use the 1 page PDF and magnify), great for "ticking off people" if you are importing a GEDCOM or similar. The later "total re-write" versions of FTM lost the all-in-one tree (along with a lot of other features), but I now believe they are reinstating it (see below), however, when I last tried I got a massive sized none searchable jpg file!!). I've not seen the later versions so they may have improved it. I HOPE WG DON'T MIND ME PUTTING THIS HERE, BUT MANY PEOPLE ACCEPT THAT THEY NEED MORE THAN 1 PIECE OF GENEALOGY SOFTWARE, EACH HAS ITS GOOD POINTS, and I would not be without the database, filtering etc etc features of TMG, just hope the reports rewrite for v8 adds some useful features. FTM2010 has an Extended Family Tree chart. You pick the names you want, no idea how good it is, and they promise an All in one in the future. They seem to be spending a lot of money on development, but to me the basic structure just does not work as a useful database. Jim Orrell

As I needed to reprint some Descendant Box Charts, I ran the reports and I saved them to a *.VCF file. However, when I reloaded it to VCF to print another copy all by double thickness "connector lines" had changed to single thickness. The chart had been generated from TMG7 with "connector lines" thickness of 2 pixels (my boxes were 1 pixel). I had made a few simple changes like repaginate, move a few boxes, and paste a very small tree from another report. I also tried saving unchanged file with the same result. However, if I changed the line from single to double from withing VCF, is seemed to keep it after save and open. Not much use if you need to do a loaege chart! I also noticed this loss of connector line thickness if I make the canvas bigger or smaller (via Tools > Diagram > Diagram Measurements). Is this a known problem? I've been using TMG for a few years now (from V5) and never noticed this problem before, perhaps I missed it! Is there a solution, perhaps a special way of saving? The only option I can think of is to save as a PDF file. Whilst that will allow reprinting, it will not allow VCF type editing.

Many thanks for the explanation. It's nice to know why something goes wrong and a way to alleviate the problem. Seems strange it was not designed to take account of that. I upped the lines thickness to 3 in the TMG report, which then looked a bit too thick in VCF, however, after your suggestion of performing Diagram Measurements to force a redraw, they then went down to a line thickness of 2, just what I wanted. This should be simple to fix in TMG, or at least it would be nice to have a comment in the help. The nearest I could find is in the section "Why Does It...?" > "Why does it show fonts at the wrong size when I open a saved chart?" which seems to be a related issue.

From my experience exporting GEDCOM to FTM (n.b. this relates to FTM 2006, so it might be different for 2009), there are 2 things to take into account. 1. I always use a GEDCOM line length of 246 rather than the default 80. For the main tags like BMD, instead of your memo being truncated to 80 chars, you get 246. Still not a lot if you have long memos. 2. If you are willing to have all your memos lumped together in FTMs "notes", you will have to use the Master Tag Type List. I use this for Event type Tags (e.g. census), but can't say for others, you will have to experiment. Edit the Tag, under "other" you will see "GEDCOM Export as", I click on the 2nd option (not Tag). For some reason FTM2006 imports the memo into its general notes for the person, but it is not truncated. Someone else might be able to explain why this happens, after a lot of frustration, I found out empirically. I find similar problems arise with other conversions (e.g. GRU). So whenever I key into the memo field I indicate what sort of tag it is, e.g. <census 1891>etc etc etc, so that if the memo gets removed from the parent tag, it is still obvious where it fits in.

I assume that Terry means create 1 Tag with lots of witnesses. Although within TMG that is great, if you want to share your data with other people who don't have TMG, those "witness" people will lose their TAG and detail. I don't know of any upload sites (Rootsweb, ancestry, GRU, Tribal Pages, trees etc) that will import Witnesses. I know GENBOX also uses them but no other database programs. Portability of data is an age old problem in IT. When you design the way you input your data, it can save a lot of time in the future if you consider where else you might want to use that data and how portable it is. So I reluctantly COPY each Tag for each person. The added problem with this is that if the original memo needs updating, then they all need updating (hence the usefulness of witnesses). You can't win. If the "powers that be" got together with some new GEDCOM standards this sort of issue could easily be sorted, but as mentioned in a recent forum, no one is holding their breath!! So being more positive, have you thought of using John Cardinal's TMG Utility. There is an option to Add Events. I've not used it myself yet, and it might be a sledgehammer to crack a nut and the memo cannot include carriage returns or tabs. Jim Orrell

Informative, yes, but the date of 2001 leaves me a little despondent. I'll look out for news. Thanks for the info Jim

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

A quick way - clear the focus group - put the main person in the focus group on their own - add others with just descendants ticked - done - a list of names and a total in the top RH corner (inc original, so take one off for total descendants)