Jump to content


Photo

Descendant indented chart problem

Not linking correctly

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#21 Michael Hannah

Michael Hannah
  • Moderators
  • 2,733 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Ranchos, New Mexico, USA
  • Interests:Genealogy, Computers

Posted 11 July 2015 - 05:03 PM

Okay, Kaye, I think I understand this report better thanks to you sending your sample chart off-list to me.
 
First, to explain the "gap"
I could see the "gap" in the line between two children who are in the same family on your chart.  It is not a TMG issue.  In fact, it is not really there :D.  It is caused by the specific "zoom" value you are using to view your chart in Word. These lines are not "drawn" in this chart. Instead the document includes text characters which look like lines.  Windows has to convert these individual line-drawing characters into pixels on the screen, and only does an approximate job.  To cause the gap to "magically" disappear, change the zoom value.  The Healy chart was being displayed at 132% zoom.  Change that to 134% and you will see the gap disappear.  Whether or not you see a gap when you print will also depend upon what zoom you use for printing.
 
Next, to explain illegitimate
You keep referring to "illegitimate" children, but their legitimacy really has no bearing on the issue.  As I mentioned earlier, grouping of families is only based on the one or two parents linked as Primary to the child.  In your own example of two children of the child "S", the first child "K" was born before the marriage of the parents (and thus was illegitimate) but the second child "R" was born after the marriage (and thus was legitimate).  Yet TMG groups both children together equally within the single family of children born to that spouse.  The legitimacy of a child has no bearing on the chart, only the child's linkage to its parents.
 
Finally, to explain the order of families
Thanks to your example chart I learned that my earlier description of sort order of families was inaccurate/incomplete.  It turns out that if there is no Primary marriage tag with a date to use, TMG uses the earliest (sort) date of the Primary Birth group tag of any child in that family.  Thus TMG works harder than I thought it did to try to get the list of separate families in an appropriate date order.  The revised description based on my further testing is:

  • All children are grouped together within the same family based on the spouse (or unknown spouse).  All children who only have this one parent linked as their Primary parent will be grouped as a single "unknown spouse" family.  (While they may actually be children of several different unknown spouses, TMG has no better alternative than to group them as one "family".)  Each entire family group is sorted based on its own single "family" sort date.
     
  • If there is a Primary marriage group tag for the parents, the (sort) date of that tag is used for the family sort date.

    If there is a Primary marriage group tag, but it has no (sort) date, a blank date is used for the family sort date which will sort before non-blank family sort dates.
     
  • If there is no Primary marriage group tag, the earliest (sort) date of a Primary tag in the Birth group of any child in that family is used as the family sort date.  Children with no Birth group (sort) date will sort first within that family, but will not affect the sort order of the family unless no child has a non-blank Birth date.

    If there is no Primary marriage group tag and no Primary Birth group (sort) date for any child in that family, a blank date is used for the family sort date which will sort before non-blank family sort dates.

    If there are multiple families with the same date (or lack of date) for sorting, an order among those families has not been determined and should be considered random.

This should explain why your example child "S", who only has the mother linked and thus has an "unknown spouse", is listed before the subsequent family where there is a marriage group tag with a date and a spouse.  This subsequent marriage group tag has a date, so that is used for its family sort date.  The birth date of the child whose father is unknown is used for the sort date of the "unknown" family, which is a date earlier than the marriage tag date.

 

This is actually very clever of TMG, as it is more likely to put the various families in chronological order whether or not there is a marriage group tag with a date or even any marriages.

 

Conclusion

As best I can tell there is no problem with TMG here.  There really is no gap in lines between children in the same family, and the order of families is the best TMG can do to get close to an appropriate chronological order.  As a final note, I tested all of this in Version 6 through Version 9 with no differences.

 

Hope this helps explain,


Michael
See my book on how I customize TMG My Way.
My website.

#22 kaye

kaye
  • Senior Members
  • 108 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 11 July 2015 - 06:49 PM

Hello Terry

 

Wow such a lot of information. Firstly I only use the words illegitimate broadly for the purpose of this query.. Sometimes the mother doesn't want the name of the father known even if they are married. I simply use it to say that no father has been given so therefore no marriage, partner spouse of whatever you want to call the parent is linked, and therefore not showing and this is why the programme shows no father. It is a generic word for the purpose of this trouble shooting.

 

Lines are not a problem. I shouldn't have mentioned it in relation to the chart I sent.  Just wanted to explain that this is not happening in my charts and it is not the gap I refer to in my current family problem..

 

What you seem to be saying is what I am saying all along. I think if I have understood this correctly. My sample family was provided to show you that this is a  normal chart as I have said all along.  What you haven't seen is the chart that I am having trouble with.  The rules for my other  family are not applying to the new one.. I have all the dates so there is no sorting problem if I understand what  you are saying. I think this is the best idea if I send it to you..

 

I appreciate your input

I will send it separately to you.

regards

Iris Wood

 

Kind regards

Kaye



#23 Terry Reigel

Terry Reigel
  • Moderators
  • 4,643 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boone, NC

Posted 12 July 2015 - 04:18 AM

Kaye,

 

You mention my name, but I assume you recognized it was Michael that provided this thorough info, and it's him you will send further details to.


Terry

See my Tutorials and Articles on using TMG at tmg.reigelridge.com

The Second Edition of my book, A Primer for The Master Genealogist, is still available
. For more information see my website.

#24 Michael Hannah

Michael Hannah
  • Moderators
  • 2,733 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Ranchos, New Mexico, USA
  • Interests:Genealogy, Computers

Posted 12 July 2015 - 01:04 PM

Kaye,

 

I have e-mailed you with a lengthy explanation of what you are seeing in the charts you sent me.  The key is that family groups are output based on a single "family" sort date which could come from either a tag in the marriage group or the eldest child's non-blank birth date.  The non-obvious issue is that if there is a marriage group tag, and that tag has a blank date, then the entire family will sort before any family with a non-blank family sort date.


Michael
See my book on how I customize TMG My Way.
My website.

#25 Michael Hannah

Michael Hannah
  • Moderators
  • 2,733 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Ranchos, New Mexico, USA
  • Interests:Genealogy, Computers

Posted 12 July 2015 - 02:24 PM

Thanks to the incentive Kaye gave me to test the details of the Descendant Indented Chart I have updated the information about this report in the Style chapter of my on-line book.  Details of how family groups are sorted in this chart are given in much more detail in a section about that report.  Hopefully this explanation will help others better understand their output in this report.


Michael
See my book on how I customize TMG My Way.
My website.

#26 kaye

kaye
  • Senior Members
  • 108 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 12 July 2015 - 06:22 PM

Sorry Michael

 

The answer below is for you not Terry. I did know it came from you. Slip of finger.

cheers'

kaye






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users