Barbara, Some people don't use SW for this reason. I use it, but when I share my data with a distant cousin via GEDCOM, I warn them that some of the source citations will appear a bit garbled.
There have been discussions about this, which you can find in the LUG archive. The problem varies with the nature of the source template. Many templates compose the citation by interspersing data from the master source and the detail source fields. When Legacy exports such a source citation to GEDCOM, all the master fields are together, followed by all the detail fields. So the resulting citation reads a bit scrambled, and there can be issues with punctuation and with label words that weren't part of the actual data. You can experiment to see what it does to your data. (I have long maintained that Legacy developers could create an optional workaround to this limitation of the GEDCOM standard. The citation could be formatted as if for printing and then written to GEDCOM as a basic-style source detail. This would be helpful for one-way transfers.) Ward -----Original Message----- From: Sherry/Support Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 3:14 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Source Writer Right - that's included in my comments about exporting to another program or uploading to a website. My point was that if you're sharing a file "Legacy to Legacy", unless you're going back to an earlier version of Legacy, you wouldn't use a gedcom. And previous versions wouldn't support the SourceWriter anyway. The important thing is that the information is exported and *should* be imported by the program you're using. Sincerely, Sherry Technical Support Legacy Family Tree On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Ron Ferguson <ronfergy....@tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > Sherry, > > Whilst what you say is accurate, many of us do export using a GEDCOM for > publication of our websites. I appreciate that this is a GEDCOM problem > rather than Legacy's. > > Ron Ferguson > http://www.fergys.co.uk/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sherry/Support > Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:46 PM > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Source Writer > > Everything you enter should be included in the gedcom. It's just that > when you import the gedcom into Legacy, the sources will show in the > "Basic" format rather than SourceWriter format. > > But, unless you're going back to an earlier version of Legacy which > doesn't support SourceWriter anyway, you wouldn't use a gedcom to move > a file from Legacy to Legacy. You'd do a backup and restore (File > > Backup Family File). The gedcom should only be used for moving data > into a different program or uploading to a website. > > > Sincerely, > Sherry > Technical Support > Legacy Family Tree > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Barbara <brc...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> Here is my dilemma: I would like to use Source Writer for my sourcing >> in Legacy to be sure that I've sourced according to standards. But now >> I've heard that the data produced using Source Writer doesn't always >> translate correctly into Gedcom. What do other people do? >> Barbara > 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
