Ron, Far be it from me to suggest a less than pristine data set. I do not plan to publish mine but use it primarily as a research tool to help me add to it. However, if the prospective parent is clearly labeled as such, as I suggested in the first place, it should not sully up the work by suggesting that it was gospel truth, but only a candidate as a parent. If the person's possible connection is given in notes, or events, or some other tactic, how is it different from being clearly labeled a candidate?.
Jane On Sunday, June 16, 2013, Ron Ferguson wrote: > Jane, > > I would almost suggest that there as as many ways of referring to possible > parents/relatives as there are users of Legacy. Personally, I would never > link persons who might possibly be related, no matter what device might be > used to indicate that the link is only a possibility. > > If the intention is to publish the tree then the link would have to be > rendered private or invisible, but even so there is a risk of a mistake or > someone seeing the raw data of deciding the link is certain without > definitive evidence. > > I am not suggesting that anybody else should take my viewpoint, but I for > one would be reluctant to see similar practices as described incorporated > into the program. There are more than enough rubbish trees published > without additional encouragement being given. > > Ron Ferguson > http://www.fergys.co.uk/ > > *From:* Jane Sarles <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', > 'sarlesinsi...@gmail.com');> > *Sent:* Sunday, June 16, 2013 3:45 PM > *To:* LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', > 'LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com');> > *Subject:* Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy Family Tree 8 Revealed - Q/A, new > Tagging options, and other surprises > > After trying several reports, it looks like that goes part way to > solving the problem, although it doesn't allow for multiple possibilities > for father identity. In addition, it would be nice if those people whose > line is not proven (the prospective father, his wife, ancestors, and other > children, could all be in a different color print, signifying that they are > only "possible" relatives. Perhaps I am asking for too much here. > > Jane > > > On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Jane Sarles <sarlesinsi...@gmail.com>wrote: > > Interesting. I did not know there was an option to show "Possible not > proved" in the children's settings. I wonder how that prints in a report? > Say - a descendant's narrative report? > > Jane > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Robert57P_gmail <robert...@gmail.com>wrote: > > I like the below suggestion - obvious in all reports. But that POSSIBLE > would show up for ALL children and it may only be one child that you are > unsure of. Another option: > In family view, right click on ANY child > Select CHILDREN'S SETTINGS > Hi-lite the appropriate child > Under RELATIONSHIP TO FATHER (or MOTHER), you can create your own options > - click the down arrow and a new window pops up > Click ADD > Put in POSSIBLE PARENT (side note - I preface my own manual entries with > a period (.Possible Parent), or you could make them all CAPS or some such > other indicator. This reminds me that it is not a pre-canned item. > Since I added it some wordings and such may need tweaking.) > > I really wish Legacy allowed us the OPTION of having this box come up on > every child add (just like the Marriage window auto-pops up when adding a > spouse). This way we could remember to set if it is a "blood-line" > (Biological) child or some other relationship. > > I also wish this would show up in the child's listing on Family View (as > an option). You'd think that going to OPTIONS, CUSTOMIZE, VIEW, SHOW > STATUS ON FAMILY VIEW would cause this to happen, but it doesn't. And I > think I ran into a report or two where I wish this could optionally show up > - but I could be wrong about that. > > Do not get RELATIONSHIP TO xxx mixed up with CHILD STATUS that is also on > this screen. Use CHILD STATUS for something that pertains ONLY to the > child (twin, still-born, etc). (I originally was putting "guardianship" > in the CHILD STATUS field, but that ended up not working well because it > implied that relationship for both parents.) > > Bob > > > > On 06/15/2013 12:39, Eliz Hanebury wrote: > > I use Possibly as part of the first name, cheap and easy to figure <G> > > Eliz > Not Today and Not without a Fight > (Anon) > > For all that has been, thanks. > For all that will be, yes. >   (Dag Hammarskjold) > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Jane Sarles <sarlesinsi...@gmail.com>wrote: > > Geoff, > > Excited to see the new version and it's looking super.  If I  may make a > suggestion- someday I should like to see an enhancement that would solve > many problems for me:  I have several ancestors for whom I have > POSSIBILITIES as their parent - but nothing set in stone.  Is it not > possible to have a category of "parent possibility" or some such name, > which would link to an ancestor SEVERAL people as prospective fathers or > mothers?  It would need to have an option to print or not print of course, > so that a print out might say: > > Candidates for the father of Joe Jones are: >    Jim Jones (RIN#), born 1744, etc., etc. >    Jerry Jones (RIN)#, died 1682 in Portugal, etc. etc. >    Jeffrey Jones, (RIN#)  living next to Joe in the 1800 census. > > I realize that it is possible to manually type in the above information, > but when I haven't worked on a person for a while, it would be helpful for > research to review the possibi > > > > 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 > 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
