Jump to content


Photo

synchronize to online family tree


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 debbieshields

debbieshields
  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 03:37 PM

When will TMG include the ability to synchronize to my family tree on familysearch.org or rootsweb?



#2 Michael Hannah

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

Posted 19 June 2013 - 03:47 PM

Hi Debbie,

 

I am only a user like yourself, and cannot speak for WhollyGenes.  However, there are a great many things that you can express in TMG that neither familysearch nor roosweb can handle.  In my opinion you would lose a large amount of your data by trying to do a direct sync from within TMG.


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

#3 Virginia Blakelock

Virginia Blakelock
  • Moderators
  • 3,178 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 19 June 2013 - 04:58 PM

Hi, Debbie -

 

Many TMG users publish their genealogy online using Second Site software - the web site builder for TMG.  There is a gallery of some of the sites here.

 

Virginia


Win7 Professional x64

#4 debbieshields

debbieshields
  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 04:59 PM

Michael -

I post my family online in order to connect to others who are researching the same lines.  Telling me that the websites can't handle all of the details and therefore I shouldn't post online is distinctly unhelpful.  When I update my info in TMG, being able to automate the update of the online tree would be a huge advantage - much better than having to make all the changes manually.  So my original question remains.



#5 debbieshields

debbieshields
  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 05:03 PM

Virginia -

Yes, I have done that.  But it's much more likely that genealogists are going to look at familysearch or rootsweb than at debbieshields.com.  So I want to post my info there, I would like to automate the process of updating it, and my original question remains.

Debbie



#6 Jim Byram

Jim Byram
  • Moderators
  • 7,340 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Framingham, MA

Posted 19 June 2013 - 05:30 PM

When will TMG include the ability to synchronize to my family tree on familysearch.org or rootsweb?

 

You need to ask Wholly Genes (support@whollygenes.com) and you are unlikely to get an answer.



#7 Michael Hannah

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

Posted 20 June 2013 - 06:43 AM

Telling me that the websites can't handle all of the details

Yes, Debbie, those websites cannot handle most of the details.

and therefore I shouldn't post online

No, Debbie, I did not mean to imply that you should not post on-line, only that I find using those specific websites not useful due to their limitations. Sorry if I was too incomplete to be clear.

So my original question remains.

As other TMG users have indicated, you can ask, but ...

In the meantime, I can think of at least three alternatives. First, making your own on-line site with SecondSite, which I personally highly recommend, as it retains all the details in TMG and is extremely simple to use. Second, export your updated TMG data to a GEDCOM file (which will cause the loss of all those same details) and then use that file to update an on-line site. Third, continue to manually update the basic information in those on-line sites.

Many users have indicated they prefer the third option. They use those sites because it is a much stripped-down version of their data, which they manually update with only the basic name-birth-marriage-death-children information. They include with that data their contact information, which might also include a pointer to their SecondSite page. These users have said they prefer to have others contact them directly to receive all the (missing) details of the specific lines of interest to the other person, or direct them to their own site.

These are probably not the answers you want to hear, but I think dealing with reality lets you move forward.
Michael
See my book on how I customize TMG My Way.
My website.

#8 Michael Hannah

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

Posted 20 June 2013 - 06:54 AM

But it's much more likely that genealogists are going to look at familysearch or rootsweb than at debbieshields.com.

I agree, Debbie, that "casual" genealogists are more likely to only look at familysearch or rootsweb. But in my opinion a serious researcher is even more likely to do a Google or similar search on ancestors' names or locations of interest, and that will find debbieshields.com. And I think serious researchers find the lack of detail on those sites only provides them with clues, rather than answers, so they keep looking.

Just my personal opinion. As I said, I can't speak for WhollyGenes, only for myself.
Michael
See my book on how I customize TMG My Way.
My website.

#9 debbieshields

debbieshields
  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 20 June 2013 - 07:34 AM

At present, when I find new information, I update my database in TMG; then I have to update the files for my website; then, in order to increase the odds that other people who are researching the same lines will find me and share info, I have to manually update the tree I've posted at familysearch or rootsweb.  Other programs have automated the process of updating online trees, so my question is - when is TMG going to add this feature?

 

Telling me to use SecondSite to create my own website is not helpful - I've already done that.  Telling me all your reasons why I don't want to post my tree on one of the popular sites is not helpful.  I do want to post there, and my question was about automating the process, which can be done with other programs.

 

The only reply so far that is at all helpful was from Jim, who said that I'm unlikely to get a reply from support@whollygenes.com.  This is disappointing, but confirms the impression I get from looking around the website.  When I click on "Recent Releases", the most recent date is in 2009.  Under "Announcements" the most recent date is in 2011.  The changelog file goes up through v 8.07 - but I have 8.08.  Other than the cruise announcement, the whole website has the feel of a house whose occupants have moved out.

 

I have stayed with TMG for many years because of certain specific features that I value, which have not been provided by other programs.  But this feature, which seems very valuable to me, is provided by other programs; and if TMG has no interest in providing it, then it might be time for me to move on, probably to RootsMagic.

 



#10 Jim Byram

Jim Byram
  • Moderators
  • 7,340 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Framingham, MA

Posted 20 June 2013 - 09:13 AM

The TMG v8.08.0000 change log is here.

http://www.whollygen...showtopic=14451



#11 Virginia Blakelock

Virginia Blakelock
  • Moderators
  • 3,178 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 20 June 2013 - 10:47 AM

Debbie -

 

The forum deals primarily with problems with the program  - and it is quiet right now.  The mailing list is very active; the June archives are here.

 

Virginia


Win7 Professional x64

#12 debbieshields

debbieshields
  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:31 PM

In case anyone was waiting with bated breath, I did get a response from TMG support.  The response was 'What do you mean by "to synchronize"?' So they've never heard of the feature, which is not very promising.  I know of 4 programs that include it, but it appears that the people at whollygenes aren't paying attention.

 

I've used TMG since version 1.2 and remember when it was the gold standard of genealogy programs.  So sad.



#13 TPG

TPG
  • Members
  • 57 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silver Spring, Maryland

Posted 21 June 2013 - 06:49 PM

I face the same problem as you do.  I have put somewhat degraded trees up on Rootsweb, Ancestry.com, and familysearch.org.  For all the reasons noted here, I keep my main file on TMG.  But I have found it useful to pick up leads from other sources with the mirrored trees on the other sites.  I don't trust any of those leads without checking for source documentation to back them up.  Nor for that matter do I don't trust any leads from the TMG files I find.  One always has to reach your own judgments and I don't accept anyone's version without checking.

 

My solution has been to generate gedcoms selected from the relevant updated TMG files and then completely replace each of the related trees on the "other" sites.  I also have written programs that inserts Witness and related data from the TMG files into the generated gedcoms to make them a bit more complete.  This is less than perfect, but it serves the purpose.

 

By the way, familysearch.org claims to have a new capability on their experimental "New Family Tree" site that will allow one to synchronize your gedcom with their single, supposedly definitive, family tree.   I've dumped the draft user manual but haven't had a chance to read it.  It apparently allows people to contest "bad information' entered by others  - something like Wikipedia. 



#14 LornaHenderson

LornaHenderson
  • Senior Members
  • 834 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Waikanae, NZ

Posted 22 June 2013 - 01:23 AM

TPG

I've been experimenting, briefly, with a gedcom from TMG that I exported to RootsMagic, so I could try out their certified sharing with FamilySearch new FamilyTree (the Old familytree has either disappeared or is about to do so).

An announcement in the last week said that FamilyTree would now accept sources from RootsMagic, I've not tried that, but have experimented with using their shoebox to save a source found in their records, later attaching it to my tree.

 

Perhaps TMG could become the second piece of certified software to directly interract with FamilyTree

 

 

Debbie

Although obviously not knowing what Whollygenes means by asking you "'What do you mean by "to synchronize"?

I would interpret that more as a request to more specifically document your requirements.

 

Mine would be

to enable me to choose which part of my database I wished to share/synchronise at any one time, and which events, with which website instead of having to go thru a gedcom.

 

 

The RM/FamilyTree does allow you to do this person by person and event by event, which would be tedious if you wished to share/synchronise a lot of data but is very suitable where the tree at the FamilyTree end has rather too many duplications

 

Ancestry/FTM has an all or nothing, which I most defintiely do not want, so restrict my links there to a one way download of ancestry data to FTM just to get a backup of my research there.

In the meantime, I continue sharing my data using SecondSite, fully selecting what I want to publish, with regularly replaced snapshots to WorldConnect of a selected subset.of people and data.

 

However other online trees don't quite cope with repeated updates via gedcoms (WikiTree, WeRelate) unless the data is new people , rather than replacement.

such is life, but unfortunate as I like fishing in all sorts of online ponds for those elusive connections.


Regards,

Lorna
Win 7 Pro  SP1 (Desktop & MacBookPro with Parallels 9)


#15 debbieshields

debbieshields
  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 22 June 2013 - 05:45 PM

Final answer from Wholly Genes: At this time there are no plans to sync TMG data automatically to any genealogy website.



#16 brojer

brojer
  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 11 February 2014 - 01:15 PM

My wife who is a much more experienced genealogist then I, says the TMG users probably would not want to sync with family search family tree because of the many errors that keep getting repeated by people who think they know something but have no proof.  They are able to make changes to the person they have no proof for, when the person who has proof has to argue about it.  It is very frustrating for the people who have proof and know what they are doing to have to keep changing it to what they know is correct and have the paperwork to back it up.  The people who are developing family search family tree are working hard on this problem and have made some progress, but some of the same problems remain.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users