If you "know" the birth order, but don't know one of the dates. you might
want to keep the children in the birth order. If you sorted them, the one
with no date would be first. I realize you can put an estimated date
instead of leaving it blank, which is what I do, but someone else might not
want to do that.
Sharon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 8:10 AM
Subject: [LegacyUG] V6 - Potential Problems - Children sorted order
Is there a reason why Legacy could not automatically correct this
potential problem? I have 39 pages of children that are not sorted
correctly - I can not think of a reason why I would not want them sorted
in order.
Any reason why to let them remain in an unsorted order? If not, can this
be added to Legacy to automatically do?
Legacy User Group guidelines can be found at:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/
To unsubscribe please visit:
http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp
Legacy User Group guidelines can be found at:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/
To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp
