“There are more than enough rubbish trees published without additional encouragement being given.”
I have to agree, we do not need a tool to improve this process. Thanks, David C Abernathy Email disclaimers ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message represents the official view of the voices in my head. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.SchmeckAbernathy.com == All outgoing and incoming mail is scanned by F-Prot Antivirus == From: Ron Ferguson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 8:31 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy Family Tree 8 Revealed - Q/A, new Tagging options, and other surprises Jane, I would almost suggest that there as as many ways of referring to possible parents/relatives as there are users of Legacy. Personally, I would never link persons who might possibly be related, no matter what device might be used to indicate that the link is only a possibility. If the intention is to publish the tree then the link would have to be rendered private or invisible, but even so there is a risk of a mistake or someone seeing the raw data of deciding the link is certain without definitive evidence. I am not suggesting that anybody else should take my viewpoint, but I for one would be reluctant to see similar practices as described incorporated into the program. There are more than enough rubbish trees published without additional encouragement being given. Ron Ferguson http://www.fergys.co.uk/ From: Jane Sarles <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 3:45 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy Family Tree 8 Revealed - Q/A, new Tagging options, and other surprises After trying several reports, it looks like that goes part way to solving the problem, although it doesn't allow for multiple possibilities for father identity. In addition, it would be nice if those people whose line is not proven (the prospective father, his wife, ancestors, and other children, could all be in a different color print, signifying that they are only "possible" relatives. Perhaps I am asking for too much here. Jane On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Jane Sarles <[email protected]> wrote: Interesting. I did not know there was an option to show "Possible not proved" in the children's settings. I wonder how that prints in a report? Say - a descendant's narrative report? Jane On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Robert57P_gmail <[email protected]> wrote: I like the below suggestion - obvious in all reports. But that POSSIBLE would show up for ALL children and it may only be one child that you are unsure of. Another option: In family view, right click on ANY child Select CHILDREN'S SETTINGS Hi-lite the appropriate child Under RELATIONSHIP TO FATHER (or MOTHER), you can create your own options - click the down arrow and a new window pops up Click ADD Put in POSSIBLE PARENT (side note - I preface my own manual entries with a period (.Possible Parent), or you could make them all CAPS or some such other indicator. This reminds me that it is not a pre-canned item. Since I added it some wordings and such may need tweaking.) I really wish Legacy allowed us the OPTION of having this box come up on every child add (just like the Marriage window auto-pops up when adding a spouse). This way we could remember to set if it is a "blood-line" (Biological) child or some other relationship. I also wish this would show up in the child's listing on Family View (as an option). You'd think that going to OPTIONS, CUSTOMIZE, VIEW, SHOW STATUS ON FAMILY VIEW would cause this to happen, but it doesn't. And I think I ran into a report or two where I wish this could optionally show up - but I could be wrong about that. Do not get RELATIONSHIP TO xxx mixed up with CHILD STATUS that is also on this screen. Use CHILD STATUS for something that pertains ONLY to the child (twin, still-born, etc). (I originally was putting "guardianship" in the CHILD STATUS field, but that ended up not working well because it implied that relationship for both parents.) Bob On 06/15/2013 12:39, Eliz Hanebury wrote: I use Possibly as part of the first name, cheap and easy to figure <G> Eliz Not Today and Not without a Fight (Anon) For all that has been, thanks. For all that will be, yes.   (Dag Hammarskjold) On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Jane Sarles <[email protected]> wrote: Geoff, Excited to see the new version and it's looking super.  If I  may make a suggestion- someday I should like to see an enhancement that would solve many problems for me:  I have several ancestors for whom I have POSSIBILITIES as their parent - but nothing set in stone.  Is it not possible to have a category of "parent possibility" or some such name, which would link to an ancestor SEVERAL people as prospective fathers or mothers?  It would need to have an option to print or not print of course, so that a print out might say: Candidates for the father of Joe Jones are:    Jim Jones (RIN#), born 1744, etc., etc.    Jerry Jones (RIN)#, died 1682 in Portugal, etc. etc.    Jeffrey Jones, (RIN#)  living next to Joe in the 1800 census. I realize that it is possible to manually type in the above information, but when I haven't worked on a person for a while, it would be helpful for research to review the possibilities. It would seem (to someone who knows nothing whatever about programming and development) that links to several persons who MAY be parents could be done.  Something I have needed for a long, long, time. Thanks for listening. Jane Sarles On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Geoff Rasmussen <[email protected]> wrote: Here's the next article: http://news.legacyfamilytree.com/legacy_news/2013/06/legacy-family-tree-8-revealed-qa.html Thanks,  Geoff Rasmussen Millennia Corporation [email protected] www.LegacyFamilyTree.com <http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/> 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 Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). 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 Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
