With all due respect, this horse has been beaten to death, buried, and totally
decomposed. Can we please move on. I for one would really appreciate it if
you and Jay could continue this discussion off list. The two of you are just
arguing (discussing) the same point over and over again. If
Ron,
I believe (hope) that Jay and I are done with this public
discussion.
A suggestion has been submitted over a week ago.
john.
At 04:24 AM 4/2/2015, Ron Bernier wrote:
With all due respect, this horse
has been beaten to death, buried, and totally decomposed. Can we
please move on. I for
Ron, whether an issue has been beaten to death depends on the
individual. As long as viewpoints are being exchanged on an issue that
is list-appropriate, someone may be lurking in the wings who is
benefitting from the discussion. Only the moderator can shut down a
discussion, and usually only
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:54 PM, John Lisle leg...@johnlisle.com wrote:
The issue with Child Status is that Legacy has chosen to export the data as
an attribute of Family instead of Person as is done by all other vendors
who export this type of data.
Probably because Child status is not a
Jay,
Please think again about what the attributes are in a default Child
Status list: Twin and Stillborn. These are attributes that are true of an
individual no matter what family they are part of. Even Adopted which has
been in earlier lists is an attribute of a person. A person is either
Jay,
I can understand your point, but respectfully disagree.
I agree that all vendors have different data models, but when a vendor
adds functionality to their product that extends the basic Gedcom data
model, it is, in my opinion, in their best interest (and that of their
customers) to see how
David,
Your point is well taken, but...
1/ Gedcom was last updated in the late 1990s. In my opinion, it will
never be updated significantly again because (a) too many applications
depend on the current implementation and from a development viewpoint are
static. For instance, RootsWeb's
One needs to remember that GEDCOM is a very old standard and has not been up
dated since the early 1990’s.
It was never designed to do a lot of things it is being forced to do today.
It was designed to convert ALL of the data in one product so it could be used
in an another product.
Now we
(Aside: It was not my intention to trigger a rant about bugs and versions. For
the record, I think Legacy is a quality product and that the number of open
defects for this type of software is not unreasonable. The product is
functional and flexible. It is stable – rarely crashing and with
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:00 AM, John Lisle leg...@johnlisle.com wrote:
What is a problem with Legacy is when Legacy does not export any of its
data OR it exports the data in a fashion that cannot be accepted by the
receiving software.
John ,
In regards to
*What is a problem with
Ward,
I agree with you completely.
I would add one thing however, that the Legacy Shared events could possibly
be handled better, so as to not cause the potential problems as it could in
its current form.
Personally, I would prefer to have a switch to not use shared events and
for the database
Agreed! They even asked me what bugs I have encountered. It is unbelievable how
many there are, and that they need me to let them know what they are!
Every time they fix one, it seems they create another. We don't know what will
get fixed and what will then not work as a result. So sad.
CE
Sorry, I am still on V7.5
This is just another reason I won’t upgrade to V8.
Regards,
Jennifer
http://colston-wenck.com
From: CE WOOD [mailto:wood...@msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 31 March 2015 11:28 AM
To: legacyusergroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Source Comments in GEDCOM [WAS:
Yes the Privacy brackets stop the Master Source Comments appearing in
the Gedcom UNLESS you override the Privacy settings.
You can continue negative towards Legacy 8 but if you're not
encountering the bugs in Legacy 7.5 you probably won't encounter them in
Legacy 8.
The reality that fixing some
I always put privacy brackets [[ at the beginning of any text in the Master
Source text or comments field.
I sometimes use the whole of an email in text form for a source and don't want
the senders details or the whole of the text to appear anywhere.
Regards,
Jennifer
http://colston-wenck.com
So, do privacy brackets prevent the comments or text from appearing in the
GEDCOM? That seems to be the problem; the privacy brackets don't work.
The bug is that the parameters one sets are not recognized by the Legacy
program when it creates the GEDCOM.
CE
From: jcrock...@optusnet.com.au
16 matches
Mail list logo
