Brian, Thanks for the response.
There may be some confusion about which checkbox we are talking about on the source detail panel. I have not been referring to the one that says "Include this citation on reports" (which is always checked in my tests for this issue), but rather the one that says "Add this Detail to the Source Citation on Reports". This is an option for Basic sources, and the export and re-import work fine when checked. However, there is no such user option for individual SourceWriter sources! (Yes, there is for the Text/Comments tab, but not for the source details tab.) For SW sources, any populated source detail fields are critical and such an option would make no sense. Setting the global default in Options > Customize > Sources is also not the answer, since this would mess up any Basic sources for which you don't want the source detail text included. (And thus my comment about helping us migrate away from this scenario.) With this in mind, testing an export without the override seems pointless to me, since the all-important source details are completely missing from the Gedcom for SourceWriter-originated sources. If one has any SW sources, the override is currently mandatory. (This is also a bug, but not the one I was focusing on. Ideally, with the override off/unchecked, SW details would be exported regardless. I.e., the invisible "Add this Detail..." flag should always be turned on, internally, for SW sources.) So, in living with the above shortcoming and thus choosing to use the override during the export, I'm observing that the SW source detail fields are successfully included in the Gedcom 5.5 export. However, they are rendered invisible upon re-import into Legacy. Yes, you can manually include them after the import, but that is not a workable option, as I described below. This is the bug I was focusing on. In thinking about it, and guessing about the database and Gedcom structures, perhaps these are, in fact, both the same bug. If the invisible "Add this Detail..." flag were always turned on, internally, for SW sources, and then exported to the Gedcom, then the import should work as expected. This might be a 1-line code fix. Ward P.S.: Please add this clarification to ticket [04A-13A13DF1-6EE4]. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian/Support" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 5:19 PM Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Incomplete Export of Source Details Number 1: Yes. I am saying that the GEDCOM export will, if the override for exporting all sources is not on, honour the setting in the Source detail itself on whether the details are included in reports. If you are missing source details from some sources then check those source details and make sure that the check mark for include this citation on reports is present. If you are missing details from all your sources you may have the default setting in the Options > Customize > Sources for source details set to not including citations. Turn it on by adding a check mark then use the reset button beside that line to set all your source details to include this citation in reports. Number 2: The critical setting for including source details in the GEDCOM export is the setting I describe in Number 1. If Include this citation in reports is turned ON then the source details will be exported. If it is OFF then that source detail will not be included, only the Master Source will be cited. I just tested an export of and an import from a GEDCOM created for Legacy without using the override. The settings for including source details and including text and comments did carry over to the new file intact for both Basic Sources and for SW created sources. Brian Customer Support Millennia Corporation [email protected] http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com We are changing the world of genealogy! When replying to this message, please include all previous correspondence. Thanks. On 30/05/2010 6:56 PM, Ward Walker wrote: > Brian, > > Please clarify. I think you are saying two things here: > (1) that the source details will be left out of the Gedcom if not part of > the citation in the originating database; and > (2) if the source details ARE present in the Gedcom, then they will always > be ignored unless one does something in the target database to include > them > in the citations -- either globally or individually -- after the import. > > For (1), I do not find that result. Of course, the export option to > override > MUST be checked, in order to get the (essential) details for SW sources. > Then all source details are exported. > > For (2), it depends. For sources that were Basic in the originating > database, the option to include the details or not seems to somehow be > carried over into the target database (at least if Legacy does the > import). > This is good. However, for sources that were SW in the originating > database, > and now forced into Basic format in the target database, the 'option' to > include details is always set initially to off. This is not good. These SW > sources should be treated just as if they had been Basic sources with the > option set to on, in the originating database. Is this possible to fix? > > The problem with the proposed workaround of using the global option to > force > all the details to be included, following the import, is that it also > affects those sources that had originally been Basic and which had details > that one did not want included. Now, you might say that one should never > do > that, but if that is true, then the option is no longer valid and should > be > phased out. (For example, a utility function could be provided to help us > to > migrate these non-citation details from the Source Detail field to the > Text > or Comment field.) > > Do you agree that there is a bug? > > Ward > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian/Support"<[email protected]> > To:<[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 5:13 PM > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Incomplete Export of Source Details > > > If your source details are not set to be included then they will be left > out of the GEDCOM as well. > To globally change this for all the source details: > Go to Options> Customize> Sources > In the area for source details make sure the option to include these is > citations is selected > Click the reset button to have Legacy update all your source details to > be included. > > Brian > Customer Support > Millennia Corporation > [email protected] > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com > > We are changing the world of genealogy! > When replying to this message, please include all previous correspondence. > Thanks. > > On 28/05/2010 12:51 PM, Ward Walker wrote: >> Update: >> >> I just updated my (Deluxe) build from 7.4.0.30 to 7.4.0.39 and got a >> different result. (Somehow I missed or overlooked the notice of a newer >> build.) The detail information is once again present in the GEDCOM file >> and likewise in the Source Detail fields in the re-imported family file. >> This is good! However, in the Legacy family file, the check box to "Add >> this detail to the source citation on reports" is not checked. I can't >> recall whether this was the behavior during last year's tests. It looks >> like a Legacy import bug. Other systems might behave differently on >> import, as I don't think there is anything in the GEDCOM that could >> influence this import decision. >> >> If one manually checks the above box, then, as before, all the >> information >> is present in the citation, but it is badly formatted. Non-Legacy >> products >> would surely do the same, given the same GEDCOM file. >> >> An example of the formatting problem: The export of a master source >> includes the string "... e-mail<; ...", while the detail source field >> contains the string "... 27 Dec 2009> ...". The resulting output >> citation >> places these two strings in different locations! >> >> Ward >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Ward Walker >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 11:42 AM >> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Incomplete Export of Source Details >> >> >> Ron, >> >> For both problems (source details missing, and source fields >> scrambled), the test need go no further than the GEDCOM file produced by >> Legacy. The first problem is entirely a Legacy bug. The root cause of the >> second problem is the GEDCOM standard, although Legacy might be able to >> mitigate the effect somewhat during the export. >> >> Dave, Ron, and Connie, >> >> I just tried a 1-individual GEDCOM 5.5 export. The source details >> were >> completely missing from the SW-originated citations, although the text >> from the Text/Comments tab of the Detail was present. (The source details >> from a Basic-originated citation were not missing.) The 2 SW templates >> involved in this test were: Internet> Website, generic (as in Dave's >> test) and Email> Grouped by corresponent. >> >> The templates that I had investigated last year all had the details >> in >> the export. I don't recall if I looked at these 2. Perhaps Legacy has >> changed such that details are now missing for ALL templates! If so, a >> serious, but understandable, problem has evolved into a major defect. >> >> Ward >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Ron Ferguson >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 3:44 AM >> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Incomplete Export of Source Details >> >> >> Dave, >> >> One of the reasons I suggested that you test is because there are >> two >> programs involved, Legacy and TNG. Whilst my main method of publishing my >> data is on websites I do not like TNG, much preferring the Legacy >> Pedigree >> pages. What one needs to consider is not only whether Legacy is exporting >> the Source Details etc. but whether the importing program is reading them >> correctly. >> >> Yesterday I exported to a GEDCOM 5.5 and imported into My Heritage, >> and the Source Details do not seem to be there. I have yet to examine the >> problem in detail but I suspect that they are in My Heritage somewhere, >> and are simply not being included in its reports. This could be the case >> with TNG. >> >> I know that there are a number of users who do use TNG and perhaps >> one of them could advise on this question. But I still consider that it >> is >> something best tested on one's own set up. >> >> Ron Ferguson >> _____________________________________________________ >> >> *New* Tutorial: Add Location Pins to Google Earth >> http://www.fergys.co.uk >> Includes the family tree for Alan J Grimshaw >> And the Fergusons of N.W. England >> ____________________________________________________ >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Dave Keeney >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: 28 May 2010 04:18 >> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Incomplete Export of Source Details >> >> >> Maybe it's different by SW template. I'm talking about Internet> >> Website, generic. >> I'll check some others but I have yet to see any get exported. >> Dave >> >> >> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Connie >> Sheets<[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Dave, >> >> Legacy has always supported the exporting of "Source Detail in >> the Source Writer templates," as far as I'm concerned. There was one >> Source Writer template (Tax Records) I'm aware of where the detail did >> not >> export; it has been fixed. >> >> Connie >> >> >> >> --- On Thu, 5/27/10, Dave Keeney<[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Has there been any advances to this issue in the last year? >> >> E.G. has Legacy stated that they will support the exporting of >> Source >> Detail in the Source Writer templates? Or anything like that? >> >> If not I'll need to go back and unconvert all of my Source >> Writer >> sources. >> >> Legacy is an important part of my genealogy toolbox, but no >> more >> important that my use of TNG. They have to work together, at >> least for >> me. 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
