Plain text please. Honestly, it is a real nuisance to sort out all of the HTML gibberish. Thanks.
Eric ----- Original Message ----- From: "List Server" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <undisclosed-recipients:> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 2:54 AM Subject: [LegacyUserGroup DIGEST] > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "C W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] How to..... > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 18:32:03 +0000 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >From: "J. Hugh Sullivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: [LegacyUG] How to..... > >Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 09:57:49 -0600 > > > >I am thinking of merging 3 distinct genealogy data bases which I have kept > >separate for various reasons, one being that I need proof of two links and > >all I have is preponderance of evidence of the links. I'm too lazy to read > >the help file which never answers all my questions anyhow. > > > >If one has merged data bases spanning from Adam and Eve to the youngest > >grandchild, what is the easiest and most accurate way to separate into the > >3 distinct groups again using the Legacy program? > > > >Using the Surety Level for Sources in Legacy, what is the consensus for > >adding only provable links compared to links based on preponderance of > >evidence? Does this vary depending on whether you publish or exchange data? > > > >Is there an authoritative reference for defining "preponderance of > >evidence"? > > > >Legacy permits adding a source for each name in one's data base. How many > >people actually add a source for the name? > > > >Although this is on-topic, there is a chance that many people are > >uninterested in the answers. If you believe that to be a problem, please > >respond by e-mail. > > > > > >To unsubscribe please visit: > >http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > >Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: > >http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "Holden Clan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [LegacyUG] Help! I screwed up VERY badly! > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:08:52 -0500 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Okay, I've just spent HOURS AND HOURS hand keying in a ton of > information from a certain book. I put in all the information about the > book as a Master Source. I then went to the Source Clipboard and entered > the book as the Source being cited. I double checked to make sure it was > correct. Then, I went and began entering the ton and even more of a ton > of information using the Source Clipboard. Somewhere, somehow, something > went wrong. When it was all over and done. I noticed that the Source > Clipboard had been citing the WRONG source! It started out fine citing > the correct one, but by the end it was citing something that had nothing > to do with this line of the family. Woe is me! It's so much stuff that I > can't even begin to tell where it went wrong. > > I'm SO upset! How can I fix it? Is there any way at all? I don't want to > have to replace EACH and EVERY citing I made on the source. That would > take longer than it would to just key in all the information again and > that was hours. There just HAS to be an easy way to replace the messed > up source citings. > PLEASE tell me there is. I think I'm going to be sick. > > Thanks so much, > > Cindy > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "T. Dan Wollam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [LegacyUG] Picture Problems > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 14:21:05 -0800 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > I have successfully loaded hundreds of pictures into the picture > sub-directory, but recently I occasionally can't find a desired picture to > attach it to the proper file. If I exit Legacy and open my Windows > Explorer, I find the picture in the proper directory, so I know that it's > there, but when I go back into Legacy and attempt to attach it to a specific > record, like magic it's not there. It doesn't seem to make any difference > as to what the file format is, either. I have done the Check/Repair > utility, with no success. > > I can sometimes successfully load and attach six or seven pictures without > problems, then the next one or two seem to vanish on me. Anyone know what's > going on? > > Dan Wollam > Port Hadlock, WA > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 23:58:19 +0100 > From: Kristian Fjeldsg�rd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Help! I screwed up VERY badly! > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 1. Make a backup as is or make a copy of your file, or both to be sure. > 2. If you have entered the person in one session, find the start end ending and > try to tag them so that you have a focus group. Copy them to a new family file, > and you have brought the actual sources to that file. > 3. Go to View/Master lists in that new file and combine the bad main sources > with the good one. I don't know if you keep the source details but it's a > possible way around. > 4. In your original, make sure that the tagged records only are them you want to > change the source of. > 5. The problem is, how many links do you have, if one unlink, if more take > notice of the Rin numbers and names and untag. > 6. Delete the tagged individuals in the copy of you main file and import the > cleaned file. Merge the link persons and clean up the link records. > (The unlink way may be an easy way to tag the records) > > I assume that you know of options in the name list, and view lists in the master > lists. > > It may be other ways through editing in source in the name list, if the numbers > is low, about 200. Or go into every record. > > What happened: Legacy froze before you closed down the computer after entering > the new main source. Open Legacy again recover the deleted old main source. > I also had a problem a year ago, closing down Legacy meant creating a new > source, sometime hiding on the clipboard as source 2. > I have done in a habit to take a look on the clipboard keeping up a session > after closing down either the program or computer. > > Another advice: split up your sources in many main sources. > > Kristian in Norway > > Holden Clan skrev: > > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 21:47:37 EST > Subject: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --part1_cb.1b12e905.29612bc9_boundary > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > In order to extract all of the information I can in one pass from a record, I > run into a faulty assumption by Legacy that I can find no way to override. > > Here's the situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I know that > John's date of death has to be after Mary's date of death. That is valuable > information that I want to store in John's death date field as "Aft dd mmm > yyyy" (e.g "Aft 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to take any entry in the > death date field as a reason to force the LIVING / DEAD field to DEAD. But > that is faulty information. I have no idea that the person is dead yet. But > once Legacy makes its faulty decision of DEAD, the check circles are grayed > out, and there is nothing that I can do to change it -- other than to stash > the valuable death date information in some non-standard place. > > What makes this especially bad is that when I try to generate a privacy-aware > web site, it treats Joe as dead and puts out all his information, even though > he may not be dead at all. > > This is not good. > > I want a way to set the LIVING / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, on a > person by person basis. I do not want Legacy calling people DEAD when there > is no evidence to support that assertion. > > Wesley Johnston > > --part1_cb.1b12e905.29612bc9_boundary > Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > <HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In order to extract all of the information I can in one pass from a record, I run into a faulty assumption by Legacy that I can find no way to override. > <BR> > <BR>Here's the situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I know that John's date of death has to be after Mary's date of death. That is valuable information that I want to store in John's death date field as "Aft dd mmm yyyy" (e.g "Aft 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to take any entry in the death date field as a reason to force the LIVING / DEAD field to DEAD. But that is faulty information. I have no idea that the person is dead yet. But once Legacy makes its faulty decision of DEAD, the check circles are grayed out, and there is nothing that I can do to change it -- other than to stash the valuable death date information in some non-standard place. > <BR> > <BR>What makes this especially bad is that when I try to generate a privacy-aware web site, it treats Joe as dead and puts out all his information, even though he may not be dead at all. > <BR> > <BR>This is not good. > <BR> > <BR>I want a way to set the LIVING / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, on a person by person basis. I do not want Legacy calling people DEAD when there is no evidence to support that assertion. > <BR> > <BR> Wesley Johnston</FONT></HTML> > > --part1_cb.1b12e905.29612bc9_boundary-- > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "Samuel Weldon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 20:03:50 -0700 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C1916D.19D9EE20 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > what Legacy does is something is in the death block it assumes the person > is dead. Why not put that information in the death note then Legacy will > not mark him as dead. At the end of the death block there is a triangle and > a plus sign click on the plus sign and it brings up a note area where you > could put that information. > > Samuel Weldon > 9344 Laity Dr. > El Paso, TX. 79925-6639 > 915-592-6935 > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~weldonfamily > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 7:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After > ..." > > > In order to extract all of the information I can in one pass from a > record, I run into a faulty assumption by Legacy that I can find no way to > override. > > Here's the situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I know > that John's date of death has to be after Mary's date of death. That is > valuable information that I want to store in John's death date field as "Aft > dd mmm yyyy" (e.g "Aft 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to take any entry in > the death date field as a reason to force the LIVING / DEAD field to DEAD. > But that is faulty information. I have no idea that the person is dead yet. > But once Legacy makes its faulty decision of DEAD, the check circles are > grayed out, and there is nothing that I can do to change it -- other than to > stash the valuable death date information in some non-standard place. > > What makes this especially bad is that when I try to generate a > privacy-aware web site, it treats Joe as dead and puts out all his > information, even though he may not be dead at all. > > This is not good. > > I want a way to set the LIVING / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, on > a person by person basis. I do not want Legacy calling people DEAD when > there is no evidence to support that assertion. > > Wesley Johnston > > ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C1916D.19D9EE20 > Content-Type: text/html; > charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> > <HTML><HEAD> > <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; = > charset=3Dus-ascii"> > > > <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4912.300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> > <BODY> > <DIV><SPAN class=3D159180003-31122001><FONT face=3DArial = > color=3D#0000ff> =20 > what Legacy does is something is in the death block it assumes the = > person is=20 > dead. Why not put that information in the death note then Legacy = > will not=20 > mark him as dead. At the end of the death block there is a = > triangle and a=20 > plus sign click on the plus sign and it brings up a note area where you = > could=20 > put that information.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <P><FONT size=3D2>Samuel Weldon<BR>9344 Laity Dr.<BR>El Paso, TX. =20 > 79925-6639<BR>915-592-6935<BR><A target=3D_blank=20 > href=3D"http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~weldonfamily";>http://fre= > epages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~weldonfamily</A></FONT>=20 > </P> > <BLOCKQUOTE> > <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT = > face=3DTahoma=20 > size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]<B>On Behalf Of=20 > </B>[EMAIL PROTECTED]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, December 30, 2001 7:48=20 > PM<BR><B>To:</B> [EMAIL PROTECTED]<BR><B>Subject:</B>=20 > [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After=20 > ..."<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT = > size=3D2>In order to=20 > extract all of the information I can in one pass from a record, I run = > into a=20 > faulty assumption by Legacy that I can find no way to override. = > <BR><BR>Here's=20 > the situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I know that = > John's=20 > date of death has to be after Mary's date of death. That is valuable=20 > information that I want to store in John's death date field as "Aft dd = > mmm=20 > yyyy" (e.g "Aft 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to take any entry in = > the death=20 > date field as a reason to force the LIVING / DEAD field to DEAD. But = > that is=20 > faulty information. I have no idea that the person is dead yet. But = > once=20 > Legacy makes its faulty decision of DEAD, the check circles are grayed = > out,=20 > and there is nothing that I can do to change it -- other than to stash = > the=20 > valuable death date information in some non-standard place. = > <BR><BR>What makes=20 > this especially bad is that when I try to generate a privacy-aware web = > site,=20 > it treats Joe as dead and puts out all his information, even though he = > may not=20 > be dead at all. <BR><BR>This is not good. <BR><BR>I want a way to set = > the=20 > LIVING / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, on a person by person = > basis. I=20 > do not want Legacy calling people DEAD when there is no evidence to = > support=20 > that assertion.=20 > <BR><BR> Wesley=20 > Johnston</FONT> </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML> > > ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C1916D.19D9EE20-- > > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "Henry Peterson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 21:20:56 -0600 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Put the comments in the general or research notes > Henry > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 8:47 PM > Subject: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > > > In order to extract all of the information I can in one pass from a record, > I run into a faulty assumption by Legacy that I can find no way to override. > > Here's the situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I know that > John's date of death has to be after Mary's date of death. That is valuable > information that I want to store in John's death date field as "Aft dd mmm > yyyy" (e.g "Aft 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to take any entry in the > death date field as a reason to force the LIVING / DEAD field to DEAD. But > that is faulty information. I have no idea that the person is dead yet. But > once Legacy makes its faulty decision of DEAD, the check circles are grayed > out, and there is nothing that I can do to change it -- other than to stash > the valuable death date information in some non-standard place. > > What makes this especially bad is that when I try to generate a > privacy-aware web site, it treats Joe as dead and puts out all his > information, even though he may not be dead at all. > > This is not good. > > I want a way to set the LIVING / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, on a > person by person basis. I do not want Legacy calling people DEAD when there > is no evidence to support that assertion. > > Wesley Johnston > > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "Jim Winfrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:31:36 -0500 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Wesley, > > I think the problem is that you're putting informant (witness) event data > under John's death date in the database. Legacy correctly reads the > information as the death date for John. A better option is to establish a > "Witness" event or to record the informant data in general notes. Either > way it will be reported correctly. > > Jim Winfrey > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 9:47 PM > Subject: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > > > > In order to extract all of the information I can in one pass from a > record, I > > run into a faulty assumption by Legacy that I can find no way to override. > > > > Here's the situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I know > that > > John's date of death has to be after Mary's date of death. That is > valuable > > information that I want to store in John's death date field as "Aft dd mmm > > yyyy" (e.g "Aft 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to take any entry in the > > death date field as a reason to force the LIVING / DEAD field to DEAD. But > > that is faulty information. I have no idea that the person is dead yet. > But > > once Legacy makes its faulty decision of DEAD, the check circles are > grayed > > out, and there is nothing that I can do to change it -- other than to > stash > > the valuable death date information in some non-standard place. > > > > What makes this especially bad is that when I try to generate a > privacy-aware > > web site, it treats Joe as dead and puts out all his information, even > though > > he may not be dead at all. > > > > This is not good. > > > > I want a way to set the LIVING / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, on > a > > person by person basis. I do not want Legacy calling people DEAD when > there > > is no evidence to support that assertion. > > > > Wesley Johnston > > > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "Helen Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:04:33 -0600 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Wesley Johnson, > The problems of a death date "aft 30 Jun 1870" or similar, has led me to not > enter a "aft" date. If you will enter an event, for example a census, and > assign a source to it and in the text of the source enter the entire > contents of the census entry and attach it to the persons in the household, > you can readily see in your reports that the person was still living on "30 > Jun 1870". However, if the programers would remove the report problems on > using the "aft" date I would use it at least some of the time. I also avoid > it because of references to an 1870 death which is incorrect. > Helen Allen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 8:47 PM > Subject: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > > > > In order to extract all of the information I can in one pass from a > record, I > > run into a faulty assumption by Legacy that I can find no way to override. > > > > Here's the situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I know > that > > John's date of death has to be after Mary's date of death. That is > valuable > > information that I want to store in John's death date field as "Aft dd mmm > > yyyy" (e.g "Aft 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to take any entry in the > > death date field as a reason to force the LIVING / DEAD field to DEAD. But > > that is faulty information. I have no idea that the person is dead yet. > But > > once Legacy makes its faulty decision of DEAD, the check circles are > grayed > > out, and there is nothing that I can do to change it -- other than to > stash > > the valuable death date information in some non-standard place. > > > > What makes this especially bad is that when I try to generate a > privacy-aware > > web site, it treats Joe as dead and puts out all his information, even > though > > he may not be dead at all. > > > > This is not good. > > > > I want a way to set the LIVING / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, on > a > > person by person basis. I do not want Legacy calling people DEAD when > there > > is no evidence to support that assertion. > > > > Wesley Johnston > > > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "R. Oaks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Help! I screwed up VERY badly! > Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 23:39:03 -0500 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <html><div style='background-color:'><DIV> > <P><BR>Cindy,</P> > <P>Do I understand that information is entered in association to the correct data field, but that the content of the information is wrong? </P> > <P>I have not tried this, so it is just an idea for you to consider.</P> > <P>AFTER making a back-up, also make a GEDCOM. Then open the GEDCOM with a word processor (in text mode) and do a find replace. MS Word will do this easily.</P> > <P>Then read the GEDCOM back into Legacy.</P> > <P>Richard in Ohio</P> > <P> </P> > <P><BR> </P></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag1_etl_EN.asp'>Click Here</a><br></html> > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "R. Oaks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 00:01:02 -0500 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <html><div style='background-color:'><DIV> > <P>I think Mr. Johnston makes a very good point. While there may be alternate locations, the preferred and intutitive location for this agreed valuable data is in the death field.</P> > <P>The program could check the death data field for 'After' and automatically treat the person as living. Or, with a little more source code programing, make a logic check that if 'After' was in the field, the person would be treated as living, unless a "box" adjacent to the death field was checked allowing the user to chose. The box would only be visible if 'After' was entered.</P> > <P>I believe the same 'logic' should be applicable for 'About' or 'Before'.....</P> > <P>Richard in Ohio</P> > <P><BR><BR> </P></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a href='http://go.msn.com/bql/hmtag_etl_EN.asp'>http://explorer.msn.com</a>.<b r></html> > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< LEGACY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > From: "June McDonald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date "After ..." > Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 18:15:05 +1100 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > ------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C19227.1291A800 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > When I first started using Legacy, a couple of years ago, I asked them = > could the Living or Dead have an ? (unknown) box, such as the male, = > female has as I have several relatives whom I don't know if they are = > still alive or not and didn't know how to handle it. I was told that it = > would be incorporated in the next upgrade or whatever but when V3 came = > out it wasn't there and nothing more was heard. Obviously if it can be = > done for male/female it can be done for the alive or not, which I = > consider much more necessary. Let's hope for V4. I love Legacy but = > have always been disappointed that nothing was forthcoming. > > June McDonald, Canberra, the nation's capital > > > ----- Original Message -----=20 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 > Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 1:47 PM > Subject: [LegacyUG] Overriding Assumption of Dead for Death Date = > "After ..." > > > In order to extract all of the information I can in one pass from a = > record, I run into a faulty assumption by Legacy that I can find no way = > to override.=20 > > Here's the situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I = > know that John's date of death has to be after Mary's date of death. = > That is valuable information that I want to store in John's death date = > field as "Aft dd mmm yyyy" (e.g "Aft 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to = > take any entry in the death date field as a reason to force the LIVING / = > DEAD field to DEAD. But that is faulty information. I have no idea that = > the person is dead yet. But once Legacy makes its faulty decision of = > DEAD, the check circles are grayed out, and there is nothing that I can = > do to change it -- other than to stash the valuable death date = > information in some non-standard place.=20 > > What makes this especially bad is that when I try to generate a = > privacy-aware web site, it treats Joe as dead and puts out all his = > information, even though he may not be dead at all.=20 > > This is not good.=20 > > I want a way to set the LIVING / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, = > on a person by person basis. I do not want Legacy calling people DEAD = > when there is no evidence to support that assertion.=20 > > Wesley Johnston=20 > > ------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C19227.1291A800 > Content-Type: text/html; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> > <HTML><HEAD> > <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" = > http-equiv=3DContent-Type> > <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR> > <STYLE></STYLE> > </HEAD> > <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> > <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>When I first started using = > Legacy, a couple=20 > of years ago, I asked them could the Living or Dead have an ? (unknown) = > box,=20 > such as the male, female has as I have several relatives whom I don't = > know if=20 > they are still alive or not and didn't know how to handle = > it. I was=20 > told that it would be incorporated in the next upgrade or whatever but = > when V3=20 > came out it wasn't there and nothing more was heard. Obviously if = > it can=20 > be done for male/female it can be done for the alive or not, which = > I=20 > consider much more necessary. Let's hope for V4. I love = > Legacy but=20 > have always been disappointed that nothing was forthcoming.</FONT></DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>June McDonald, Canberra, the nation's=20 > capital<BR></FONT></DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <BLOCKQUOTE=20 > style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: = > 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"> > <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> > <DIV=20 > style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: = > black"><B>From:</B>=20 > <A href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"=20 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> </DIV> > <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20 > href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"=20 > = > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]= > om</A>=20 > </DIV> > <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, December 31, 2001 = > 1:47=20 > PM</DIV> > <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [LegacyUG] Overriding = > Assumption=20 > of Dead for Death Date "After ..."</DIV> > <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT size=3D2>In order to = > extract all=20 > of the information I can in one pass from a record, I run into a = > faulty=20 > assumption by Legacy that I can find no way to override. = > <BR><BR>Here's the=20 > situation. John was the informant at Mary's death. So I know that = > John's date=20 > of death has to be after Mary's date of death. That is valuable = > information=20 > that I want to store in John's death date field as "Aft dd mmm yyyy" = > (e.g "Aft=20 > 30 Jun 1970"). But legacy seems to take any entry in the death date = > field as a=20 > reason to force the LIVING / DEAD field to DEAD. But that is faulty=20 > information. I have no idea that the person is dead yet. But once = > Legacy makes=20 > its faulty decision of DEAD, the check circles are grayed out, and = > there is=20 > nothing that I can do to change it -- other than to stash the valuable = > death=20 > date information in some non-standard place. <BR><BR>What makes this=20 > especially bad is that when I try to generate a privacy-aware web = > site, it=20 > treats Joe as dead and puts out all his information, even though he = > may not be=20 > dead at all. <BR><BR>This is not good. <BR><BR>I want a way to set the = > LIVING=20 > / DEAD field for this person to LIVING, on a person by person basis. I = > do not=20 > want Legacy calling people DEAD when there is no evidence to support = > that=20 > assertion.=20 > <BR><BR> Wesley=20 > Johnston</FONT> </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML> > > ------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C19227.1291A800-- > To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
