It had been my understanding that subsequent citations only apply to SourceWriter sources. A quick look at the previews of some of my sources initially appeared to confirm this. However, I now see that text entered on the Text/Comments tab of a Basic source detail, with the checkbox checked to include such text on citations, does disappear for subsequent citations. (I normally use these fields for internal information, only, not for printed citations.)
So, now I understand that your initial request was to have these Basic, Detail, Text/Comment fields appear on subseqent citations, so that you could place different information in each citation. All I can suggest is that you change what you are placing on this tab, as compared to the first tab (the Source Detail field on the Detail Information tab). I.e., for each source detail, append the custom information (e.g., person's name) to the end of the always-print information (e.g., county, twp, ED#) in the Source Detail field. Don't print anything from the Text/Comment tab, which is where you fully record the census family for future reference. Would this work for you? As for the state and year, it depends on how much you are a 'lumper' or 'splitter'. For me, these are part of the master source and will always print. Even if you are an extreme lumper, I would think that the state and year should be present in every citation (from the detail, in this case). You are saying that a SourceWriter citation is more verbose than a Basic source citation. Presumably the difference is not in the data that you type in, but in the fixed fields. For example, in census templates we see the publisher "National Archives and Records Administration" fully spelled out and hardcoded. Also the term "population schedule". But note that in the subsequent citation, the publisher disappears and "pop. sch." is abbreviated. The web site, URL, series, and the term "digital images" also disappear. I can understand that your Basic source citations are briefer than the equivalent SourceWriter version on the initial citation, but the subsequent citation seems pretty bare-bones to me. Another quick test reveals that the endnotes bug is still present: subsequent citations are used in footnotes but not in endnotes! This was reported over 3 years ago. The links to the archives are at the bottom of each LUG e-mail. There are many discussions about lumping/splitting, and a few about subsequent citations. Ward ----- Original Message ----- From: "gambol" <gam...@juno.com> To: <LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 8:02 PM Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Controlling Subsequent Citation Details [WAS: Legacy 7.5 and source citation import?] Ward, I just responded to Paula on Subsequent Citation Details and yes, I should have changed to a new tread. I have been using the Basic Source templates and not the SourceWriter. This is my first serious attempt in becoming familiar with Legacy, but the SourceWriter is similar to that used in FTM. Both yield a bloated foot/endnote. I have one database that yields 35 pages of endnotes with nearly all being one line. The templet approach would considerable considerably more pages and be harder to follow for the less experienced. I am at a decision point with FamilyTreeMaker. Either I change programs, and Legacy looks to be the best option, or build a state-of-the-art XP machine and stay with v16 of FTM. FTM v16 is not stable in Vista and researchers with Win7 say forget it. Latter version of FTM are similar to RootsMagic and designed around marketing, not ease of use. So much for the soap box. Would you point me to the 2009 archives and I will see if I can master the master and detail files. Thanks for your help, Leonard On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:56:05 -0500 "Ward Walker" <wnkwal...@rogers.com> writes: > Leonard, > > We had a lot of discussion about Subsequent Citations a while back. > I think March of 2009 might be the most recent. I don't know if anything has > changed in Legacy. I know I logged some requests. > > Think of a template-driven (i.e., SourceWriter) citation as > consisting of 4 > groupings of fields: > - master fields that always appear > - master fields that disappear on subsequent citations > - detail fields that always appear > - detail fields that disappear on subsequent citations > > The same fields appear, or not, on each subsequent citation of a > given master source. If you understand which ones do so, for a particular > SourceWriter template, then you can fudge your data accordingly. By > 'fudge', I mean sometimes placing a text value in a different field than the > one suggested by the template. > > Does this help you to engineer your detail citations such that you > see the desired different detail fields in your footnotes? > > Ward > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paula Ryburn > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 1:51 PM > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy 7.5 and source citation import? > > > Leonard, I may be off-base here, but when I add the person's name in > either > the Text or Comment field on the Source DETAIL and click the check > box to > include it, then it does print in the citation. For example, I was > using > the Ill. Death Index for a couple... same source master, same date > accessed, > etc., but each had their own name in the "item" > field-----------actually, I > realize that that is what makes them different. I am including the > cert# in > the Comment field, though, and checking the box to include that. > So, maybe I am no help. I don't do footnotes, just endnotes. > (and maybe our subject has changed?) > > --Paula in Texas > > ------------------------- > > From: gambol <gam...@juno.com> > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > Sent: Mon, February 13, 2012 6:51:07 PM > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy 7.5 and source citation import? > >  > Ward, Yes this is similar. Your comments led me to the Options > > Customize > > Source tab > Source Detail Defaults. I had the first three boxes > checked > and then discovered the Reset buttons cycle through each source and > source > text and list them as one line in the reports. This is exactly > what I was > looking for, it's a shave the program does not do this as default. > > My last huddle is to get Legacy to ignore its Subsequent Citations > format as > there are many times when a census is used as source for a persons' > name, > approximate birth year and birth state. The individual's name > should > appear under Legacy's Name Event, and the year, state would appear > under the > Birth Event. What is desirable is to have two footnotes with the > same source > info; one having the name as detail and the second having year, > state as > detail. > > Are you aware of an option that allows each footnote to appear with > its own > text? The truncation as it appears in the Subsequent Citations could > happen > any where in the footnote/endnote printout and the second, etc, > usage could > be for another person. This leads to confusion on the reader's > part. > > Leonard Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ 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
