On 21 Nov 2004 Bob Janetzko wrote: > I've been getting so many good ideas on reasons for using the AKA > fields from people in this group. But to use AKA fields effectively > for several different reasons and types of data, they need to be a > little more flexible.
That's for sure! The biggest problem for me with AKAs is that they're not included in the index for web pages. For example, my Legacy-generated pedigree web pages correctly have an individual page for Rebecca STIVERS and mention that an AKA for her is Rebecca STEVES. But . . . . the index pages do not list STEVES. This defeats one of the main purposes of web pages which is to connect with others researching these same families. IMO the AKAs *must* be included in the indexes. I've reported this "problem" to Millennia and it's somewhere on their to-do list -- but I've been waiting for over a year now. To get around this problem I've written my own web page creation software which generates a separate list of indexes from a Legacy- created GeDCom and it includes the AKAs. So my web site has both sets of indexes. Cheers, -- Dave -- David Naylor, Halton Hills, Ontario, Canada. --- Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/ To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp
