[email protected] wrote: > My thoughts exactly. But I might also add that starting in version 7.0, the > relationship calculations must be redone whenever new people are added. Correct, I've had that problem. I had to reset my relations when adding new folks.
Tim Rosenlof > It no longer does it on the fly as in previous versions. I would suggest to > the OP that he go back and use the tool to re-calculate relationships to the > maximum value allowed. I might also add my congratulations on having a > database that goes back to your 25th Great grandparent. But now I'm starting > to wonder if that if really plausible. Twenty-five generations back? Good > grief, what year would that take you to? The year 500? Just wondering. > > Brian in CA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 2:30 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Relationships Incorrect > > As a matter of interest, what relationship would you expect to see? > > I'd have thought that the sister of your nth GGF would show as your nth GGA, > that being her state at time of birth. (but then again I've been wrong > before and I'm sure I'll be wrong again!). > > Bill > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:20 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [LegacyUG] Relationships Incorrect > > I have a 25th GGFather and GGMother with two children, Ralph & Cecily. > > Ralph and Cecily are each direct ancestors of mine. This is shown correctly > in Legacy by Ancestor Color Coding and by Direct Line bolding. > > Ralph is shown as my 24th GGF, married to my 24th GGMother. > > BUT, > > Cecily is shown as my 24th GGAunt, married to my 27th GGFather. > > So I guess Legacy can't figure out what to call my relationship to Cecily, > even though it knows she is a direct ancestor, as evidenced by the correct > Color Coding and Direct Line bolding. > > So Relationship Calculator is useless for me, because it is not only the far > distant ancestors where this occurs; those are just easier to find in my > database. > > Is NAMING the correct relationship just too complicated for Legacy? Is there > no way this can be fixed? > > If this cannot be fixed, PLEASE advise us users accordingly. > > > CE > > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > > Archived > messages after Nov. 21 2009: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > Archived > messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > Online > technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > > To > unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
