Bill, There is not now a way to change the order of the input fields. An interesting thought though. I'll log it in our system for future consideration.
There is also not a way for the user to create their own templates. You can however use the Override tool to customize the output. Can you provide examples of the models in Evidence! that are not covered in Evidence Explained? If there are omissions in the new publication we'd be happy to consider it. Thanks, Geoff Rasmussen Millennia Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.LegacyFamilyTree.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Bienia Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 8:11 AM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: [LegacyUG] Version 7 Source-Writer - for Geoff The new Source Writer seems to have all the necessary fields to match the new Evidence Explained (as has been noted on the list before.) However some of the fields are in an order that I would not have used since the display in some of the on-screen lists can be confusing. For instance, the citation detail for 1850 (and other) U.S. census have the Roll number field at the beginning of the citation detail fields, but it appears in a citation at the end. As a result when you view, for example, the Assigned Sources window, it appears in the Detail as, "Lake Prairie, 187, 290, 151, 156" etc. (i.e. name, roll#, page#, Dwelling#, family#, etc.) Is there a way to change the order of the fields to put the roll number at the end to correspond to where it appears in the citation? I also have several other related questions about the Source Writer: 1) Is there a way to create new citation templates which are not covered in the supplied set, i.e. those from Evidence Explained? (Elizabeth Mills acknowledges that there were just too many to include every possible citation in the book.) For instance, the citations for non-US countries are limited in scope. 2) Is there a way to create new templates to match the arrangements of citation elements shown in Evidence! (1997), which are still valid, but weren't covered in Evidence Explained since the two volumes compliment each other rather than one replacing the other? Many people have Evidence! as a reference and may never need to move up to Evidence Explained. Thanks, Bill Bill Bienia, PLCGS www.CobblestoneLegacies.com Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
