Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

[CE WOOD]

Many thanks!
CE

From: br...@the-lightfoots.com
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 16:56:16 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW:  Chronology View

There has been only one US Census that was effective on 1 January and that was 
the 1920 Census. Prior to that, the 1910 Census was effective 15 April, and 
prior to that all previous ones were effective 1 June. Since the 1920 census, 
the most recent ones were effective 1 April. The date of the census is set by 
Congress which probably explains why we see so many different dates. Can you 
imagine the census enumerators trudging through the back roads covered in snow 
and ice during January?  
Brian in CA  From: LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:39 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View Be aware that the date on which the 
census taker took the information is not the date of residence, occupation, or 
age of persons. The census taker asked what those were as of the date printed 
in one of the header boxes of the census form, which was usually 1 January of 
the census year.
CE 
  -- 

LegacyUserGroup mailing list
LegacyUserGroup@legacyusers.com
To manage your subscription and unsubscribe 
http://legacyusers.com/mailman/listinfo/legacyusergroup_legacyusers.com
Archives at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/

Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

[Brian Lightfoot]

There has been only one US Census that was effective on 1 January and that
was the 1920 Census. Prior to that, the 1910 Census was effective 15 April,
and prior to that all previous ones were effective 1 June. Since the 1920
census, the most recent ones were effective 1 April.

The date of the census is set by Congress which probably explains why we see
so many different dates. Can you imagine the census enumerators trudging
through the back roads covered in snow and ice during January?

 

 

Brian in CA

 

 

From: LegacyUserGroup [mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On
Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:39 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

 

Be aware that the date on which the census taker took the information is not
the date of residence, occupation, or age of persons. The census taker asked
what those were as of the date printed in one of the header boxes of the
census form, which was usually 1 January of the census year.


CE 





-- 

LegacyUserGroup mailing list
LegacyUserGroup@legacyusers.com
To manage your subscription and unsubscribe 
http://legacyusers.com/mailman/listinfo/legacyusergroup_legacyusers.com
Archives at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/

[LegacyUG] Census Dates

[Martha Graham]

I have appreciated the different ideas about what date to use for Census 
data in Events.
And I have to agree with what John shared as that is what I do. I record 
the date the Enumerator was at the door. I have many instances of 
children and other family members being in 'two places at once' which 
would occur if I used the 'official date'.


Thanks to all for sharing.

Martha
In Los Osos, CA
And for my first Census appearance: 1940, Los Angeles, CA-- 

LegacyUserGroup mailing list
LegacyUserGroup@legacyusers.com
To manage your subscription and unsubscribe 
http://legacyusers.com/mailman/listinfo/legacyusergroup_legacyusers.com
Archives at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/

Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

[CE WOOD]

Great!

CE 

From: dwquig...@cox.net
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 15:33:48 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW:  Chronology View

Not to quibble, but although the official date is what was supposed to have 
been the criteria for enumeration, I have seen too many instances of the data 
apparently being taken as of the date of the enumeration.  As I said, that was 
incorrect, but I still believe it happened.  That is why I always record both 
the official date and the date of the enumeration. Donald QuigleyEscondido, 
CAQuigley Doyle Family Tree  From: LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 3:06 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup 
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View That's exactly why it is important 
to view the actual census page itself. Many transcribers make egregious errors, 
so ancestry.com summaries, for instance, too often contain errors in names, 
dates, et alia. The date that the census taker interviews is not the date 
either; it is the date in the box below NAME.

For your example

" 22  Jul 19, 1850  Census-Household Member:1850 US 
(Hamilton P. Cole).Columbia, Herkimer, New York, USA."

The US Census Form in 1850 used the date of June 1, 1850.
Specifically:

"Name of every Person whose usual place of abode on the first day of June, 
1859, was in this family"

So, the US Census information is that he was a household member on June 1st, 
1850. If the enumeration date was the 19th, that is not the date the US Census 
says he was a household member.


CEFrom: dwquig...@cox.net
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:36:40 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology ViewYes, I know.  But you should also be 
cautious because some (many) records seem to have been incorrectly filled out 
as of the date the census was taken – as in the example I gave below, where the 
official 1850 census date was June 1st. Donald QuigleyEscondido, CAQuigley 
Doyle Family Tree  From: LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:39 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup 
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View Be aware that the date on which the 
census taker took the information is not the date of residence, occupation, or 
age of persons. The census taker asked what those were as of the date printed 
in one of the header boxes of the census form, which was usually 1 January of 
the census year.

CE From: wnkwal...@rogers.com
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:26:57 -0400
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology ViewIf you know enough to manually sort 
the partial date, but not enough to give it an exact date, perhaps you could 
change it to use keywords like ‘after’ or ‘about’. For example, change ‘1850’ 
to ‘Aft 4 Jul 1850’, ‘Aft Jul 1850’, or ‘Abt Jul 1850’. Then it would sort 
appropriately. I presume that you don’t trust the census date to accurately 
reflect the actual date of residence, but you have a guess as to when the 
residence truly applies. Otherwise, you would use the exact date for both 
events, or not even bother having both events.Ward From: Cathy Pinner Sent: 
Monday, 18 July, 2016 11:28 PMTo: Legacy User Group Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: 
Chronology View Don,

If you want that ability, you'll need to send in a Suggestion - see the Home 
Tab or the Help Ribbon for the links to Request a Feature.

I don't think it's so simple as "use the Sort order of the individual" as the 
items may not be sorted in date order at all and that order is not going to 
make any sense on the chronology page. You may be wanting the option to sort a 
partial date as 31/12/ instead of as 1/1/ ?

Cathy

Don Quigley wrote:
Yes, but no luck.

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

Quigley Doyle Family Tree 

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Donald 
Brown
*Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 1:51 PM
*To:* 'Legacy User Group' 
*Subject :* Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Have you turned off the option to move or insert events in >options>2.2?

Donald Brown

Orangeville, Ontario, Canada

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Don 
Quigley
*Sent:* 18 July, 2016 4:40 PM
*To:* LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com 

*Subject:* [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Gerald,

I understand how Legacy (not the computer, because this is a software 
issue, not a hardware issue) sorts the Chronology View. However, it 
apparently does not have a code to provide an option to mimic the sort 
order I prefer in the data entry page for an individual.

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

Quigley Doyle Family Tree 

*From:*gerald [mailto:g...@representative.com]
*Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 8:56 AM
*To:* Don Quigley mailto:dwquig...

Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

[John S. Adams]

The official date for the 1930 census was 1 April.  My 2nd cousin appears in an 
enumeration taken 3 April in the household of his grandmother in Seminole Co, 
FL.  He also appears in his father's household in Goliad Co, TX, with the date 
17 May.  Obviously, one, or both, of the enumerators didn't follow the 
instructions. I record the census event as occurring on the enumeration date.  
In this case, I recorded two Census Events for the cousin.

John S. AdamsVentura, CA

From: dwquig...@cox.net
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 15:33:48 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW:  Chronology View

Not to quibble, but although the official date is what was supposed to have 
been the criteria for enumeration, I have seen too many instances of the data 
apparently being taken as of the date of the enumeration.  As I said, that was 
incorrect, but I still believe it happened.  That is why I always record both 
the official date and the date of the enumeration. Donald QuigleyEscondido, 
CAQuigley Doyle Family Tree  From: LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 3:06 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup 
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View That's exactly why it is important 
to view the actual census page itself. Many transcribers make egregious errors, 
so ancestry.com summaries, for instance, too often contain errors in names, 
dates, et alia. The date that the census taker interviews is not the date 
either; it is the date in the box below NAME.

For your example

" 22  Jul 19, 1850  Census-Household Member:1850 US 
(Hamilton P. Cole).Columbia, Herkimer, New York, USA."

The US Census Form in 1850 used the date of June 1, 1850.
Specifically:

"Name of every Person whose usual place of abode on the first day of June, 
1859, was in this family"

So, the US Census information is that he was a household member on June 1st, 
1850. If the enumeration date was the 19th, that is not the date the US Census 
says he was a household member.


CEFrom: dwquig...@cox.net
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:36:40 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology ViewYes, I know.  But you should also be 
cautious because some (many) records seem to have been incorrectly filled out 
as of the date the census was taken – as in the example I gave below, where the 
official 1850 census date was June 1st. Donald QuigleyEscondido, CAQuigley 
Doyle Family Tree  From: LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:39 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup 
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View Be aware that the date on which the 
census taker took the information is not the date of residence, occupation, or 
age of persons. The census taker asked what those were as of the date printed 
in one of the header boxes of the census form, which was usually 1 January of 
the census year.

CE From: wnkwal...@rogers.com
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:26:57 -0400
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology ViewIf you know enough to manually sort 
the partial date, but not enough to give it an exact date, perhaps you could 
change it to use keywords like ‘after’ or ‘about’. For example, change ‘1850’ 
to ‘Aft 4 Jul 1850’, ‘Aft Jul 1850’, or ‘Abt Jul 1850’. Then it would sort 
appropriately. I presume that you don’t trust the census date to accurately 
reflect the actual date of residence, but you have a guess as to when the 
residence truly applies. Otherwise, you would use the exact date for both 
events, or not even bother having both events.Ward From: Cathy Pinner Sent: 
Monday, 18 July, 2016 11:28 PMTo: Legacy User Group Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: 
Chronology View Don,

If you want that ability, you'll need to send in a Suggestion - see the Home 
Tab or the Help Ribbon for the links to Request a Feature.

I don't think it's so simple as "use the Sort order of the individual" as the 
items may not be sorted in date order at all and that order is not going to 
make any sense on the chronology page. You may be wanting the option to sort a 
partial date as 31/12/ instead of as 1/1/ ?

Cathy

Don Quigley wrote:
Yes, but no luck.

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

Quigley Doyle Family Tree 

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Donald 
Brown
*Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 1:51 PM
*To:* 'Legacy User Group' 
*Subject :* Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Have you turned off the option to move or insert events in >options>2.2?

Donald Brown

Orangeville, Ontario, Canada

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Don 
Quigley
*Sent:* 18 July, 2016 4:40 PM
*To:* LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com 

*Subject:* [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Gerald,

I understan

Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

[Don Quigley]

Not to quibble, but although the official date is what was supposed to have
been the criteria for enumeration, I have seen too many instances of the
data apparently being taken as of the date of the enumeration.  As I said,
that was incorrect, but I still believe it happened.  That is why I always
record both the official date and the date of the enumeration.

 

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

  Quigley Doyle Family Tree

 

 

From: LegacyUserGroup [mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On
Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 3:06 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup 
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

 

That's exactly why it is important to view the actual census page itself.
Many transcribers make egregious errors, so ancestry.com summaries, for
instance, too often contain errors in names, dates, et alia. The date that
the census taker interviews is not the date either; it is the date in the
box below NAME.

For your example

" 22  Jul 19, 1850  Census-Household Member:1850 US
(Hamilton P. Cole).Columbia, Herkimer, New York, USA."

The US Census Form in 1850 used the date of June 1, 1850.
Specifically:

"Name of every Person whose usual place of abode on the first day of June,
1859, was in this family"

So, the US Census information is that he was a household member on June 1st,
1850. If the enumeration date was the 19th, that is not the date the US
Census says he was a household member.


CE

  _  

From: dwquig...@cox.net  
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com 

Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:36:40 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Yes, I know.  But you should also be cautious because some (many) records
seem to have been incorrectly filled out as of the date the census was taken
- as in the example I gave below, where the official 1850 census date was
June 1st.

 

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

  Quigley Doyle Family Tree

 

 

From: LegacyUserGroup [mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On
Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:39 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup mailto:legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com> >
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

 

Be aware that the date on which the census taker took the information is not
the date of residence, occupation, or age of persons. The census taker asked
what those were as of the date printed in one of the header boxes of the
census form, which was usually 1 January of the census year.


CE 

  _  

From: wnkwal...@rogers.com  
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com 

Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:26:57 -0400
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

If you know enough to manually sort the partial date, but not enough to give
it an exact date, perhaps you could change it to use keywords like 'after'
or 'about'. For example, change '1850' to 'Aft 4 Jul 1850', 'Aft Jul 1850',
or 'Abt Jul 1850'. Then it would sort appropriately.

 

I presume that you don't trust the census date to accurately reflect the
actual date of residence, but you have a guess as to when the residence
truly applies. Otherwise, you would use the exact date for both events, or
not even bother having both events.

 

   Ward

 

From: Cathy Pinner   

Sent: Monday, 18 July, 2016 11:28 PM

To: Legacy User Group   

Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

 

Don,

If you want that ability, you'll need to send in a Suggestion - see the Home
Tab or the Help Ribbon for the links to Request a Feature.

I don't think it's so simple as "use the Sort order of the individual" as
the items may not be sorted in date order at all and that order is not going
to make any sense on the chronology page. You may be wanting the option to
sort a partial date as 31/12/ instead of as 1/1/ ?

Cathy

Don Quigley wrote:


Yes, but no luck.

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

Quigley Doyle Family Tree 

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Donald 
Brown
*Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 1:51 PM
*To:* 'Legacy User Group' mailto:legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com> >
*Subject :* Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Have you turned off the option to move or insert events in >options>2.2?

Donald Brown

Orangeville, Ontario, Canada

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Don 
Quigley
*Sent:* 18 July, 2016 4:40 PM
*To:* LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
  

*Subject:* [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Gerald,

I understand how Legacy (not the computer, because this is a software 
issue, not a hardware issue) sorts the Chronology View. However, it 
apparently does not have a code to provi

Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

[CE WOOD]

Oops! Typo!


"Name of every Person whose usual place of abode on the first day of June, 
1850, was in this family"

CE 

From: wood...@msn.com
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 15:06:26 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW:  Chronology View




That's exactly why it is important to view the actual census page itself. Many 
transcribers make egregious errors, so ancestry.com summaries, for instance, 
too often contain errors in names, dates, et alia. The date that the census 
taker interviews is not the date either; it is the date in the box below NAME.

For your example

   
" 22  Jul 19, 1850  Census-Household Member:1850 US 
(Hamilton P. Cole).Columbia, Herkimer, New York, USA."

The US Census Form in 1850 used the date of June 1, 1850.
Specifically:

"Name of every Person whose usual place of abode on the first day of June, 
1859, was in this family"

So, the US Census information is that he was a household member on June 1st, 
1850. If the enumeration date was the 19th, that is not the date the US Census 
says he was a household member.


CE

From: dwquig...@cox.net
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:36:40 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW:  Chronology View

Yes, I know.  But you should also be cautious because some (many) records seem 
to have been incorrectly filled out as of the date the census was taken – as in 
the example I gave below, where the official 1850 census date was June 1st. 
Donald QuigleyEscondido, CAQuigley Doyle Family Tree  From: LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:39 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup 
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View Be aware that the date on which the 
census taker took the information is not the date of residence, occupation, or 
age of persons. The census taker asked what those were as of the date printed 
in one of the header boxes of the census form, which was usually 1 January of 
the census year.

CE From: wnkwal...@rogers.com
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:26:57 -0400
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology ViewIf you know enough to manually sort 
the partial date, but not enough to give it an exact date, perhaps you could 
change it to use keywords like ‘after’ or ‘about’. For example, change ‘1850’ 
to ‘Aft 4 Jul 1850’, ‘Aft Jul 1850’, or ‘Abt Jul 1850’. Then it would sort 
appropriately. I presume that you don’t trust the census date to accurately 
reflect the actual date of residence, but you have a guess as to when the 
residence truly applies. Otherwise, you would use the exact date for both 
events, or not even bother having both events.Ward From: Cathy Pinner Sent: 
Monday, 18 July, 2016 11:28 PMTo: Legacy User Group Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: 
Chronology View Don,

If you want that ability, you'll need to send in a Suggestion - see the Home 
Tab or the Help Ribbon for the links to Request a Feature.

I don't think it's so simple as "use the Sort order of the individual" as the 
items may not be sorted in date order at all and that order is not going to 
make any sense on the chronology page. You may be wanting the option to sort a 
partial date as 31/12/ instead of as 1/1/ ?

Cathy

Don Quigley wrote:
Yes, but no luck.

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

Quigley Doyle Family Tree 

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Donald 
Brown
*Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 1:51 PM
*To:* 'Legacy User Group' 
*Subject :* Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Have you turned off the option to move or insert events in >options>2.2?

Donald Brown

Orangeville, Ontario, Canada

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Don 
Quigley
*Sent:* 18 July, 2016 4:40 PM
*To:* LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com 

*Subject:* [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Gerald,

I understand how Legacy (not the computer, because this is a software 
issue, not a hardware issue) sorts the Chronology View. However, it 
apparently does not have a code to provide an option to mimic the sort 
order I prefer in the data entry page for an individual.

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

Quigley Doyle Family Tree 

*From:*gerald [mailto:g...@representative.com]
*Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 8:56 AM
*To:* Don Quigley mailto:dwquig...@cox.net>>
*Subject:* Re: [LegacyUG] Chronology View

It does sort properly. But you seem not to understand how computers 
see things -- and it is not the way WE see things.

In a list of dates as you have, which do you think comes first: July 
4, 1850 or 1850. Obviously, it sorts by year first, and since 1850 is 
all alone with nothing else attached to it, it is first. Then later, 
it will look at all the additional information. It cannot tell WHEN in 
1850 it should go, so it comes to the top of 

Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

[CE WOOD]

That's exactly why it is important to view the actual census page itself. Many 
transcribers make egregious errors, so ancestry.com summaries, for instance, 
too often contain errors in names, dates, et alia. The date that the census 
taker interviews is not the date either; it is the date in the box below NAME.

For your example

   
" 22  Jul 19, 1850  Census-Household Member:1850 US 
(Hamilton P. Cole).Columbia, Herkimer, New York, USA."

The US Census Form in 1850 used the date of June 1, 1850.
Specifically:

"Name of every Person whose usual place of abode on the first day of June, 
1859, was in this family"

So, the US Census information is that he was a household member on June 1st, 
1850. If the enumeration date was the 19th, that is not the date the US Census 
says he was a household member.


CE

From: dwquig...@cox.net
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 13:36:40 -0700
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW:  Chronology View

Yes, I know.  But you should also be cautious because some (many) records seem 
to have been incorrectly filled out as of the date the census was taken – as in 
the example I gave below, where the official 1850 census date was June 1st. 
Donald QuigleyEscondido, CAQuigley Doyle Family Tree  From: LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] On Behalf Of CE WOOD
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:39 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup 
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View Be aware that the date on which the 
census taker took the information is not the date of residence, occupation, or 
age of persons. The census taker asked what those were as of the date printed 
in one of the header boxes of the census form, which was usually 1 January of 
the census year.

CE From: wnkwal...@rogers.com
To: legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:26:57 -0400
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology ViewIf you know enough to manually sort 
the partial date, but not enough to give it an exact date, perhaps you could 
change it to use keywords like ‘after’ or ‘about’. For example, change ‘1850’ 
to ‘Aft 4 Jul 1850’, ‘Aft Jul 1850’, or ‘Abt Jul 1850’. Then it would sort 
appropriately. I presume that you don’t trust the census date to accurately 
reflect the actual date of residence, but you have a guess as to when the 
residence truly applies. Otherwise, you would use the exact date for both 
events, or not even bother having both events.Ward From: Cathy Pinner Sent: 
Monday, 18 July, 2016 11:28 PMTo: Legacy User Group Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] FW: 
Chronology View Don,

If you want that ability, you'll need to send in a Suggestion - see the Home 
Tab or the Help Ribbon for the links to Request a Feature.

I don't think it's so simple as "use the Sort order of the individual" as the 
items may not be sorted in date order at all and that order is not going to 
make any sense on the chronology page. You may be wanting the option to sort a 
partial date as 31/12/ instead of as 1/1/ ?

Cathy

Don Quigley wrote:
Yes, but no luck.

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

Quigley Doyle Family Tree 

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Donald 
Brown
*Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 1:51 PM
*To:* 'Legacy User Group' 
*Subject :* Re: [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Have you turned off the option to move or insert events in >options>2.2?

Donald Brown

Orangeville, Ontario, Canada

*From:*LegacyUserGroup 
[mailto:legacyusergroup-boun...@legacyusers.com] *On Behalf Of *Don 
Quigley
*Sent:* 18 July, 2016 4:40 PM
*To:* LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com 

*Subject:* [LegacyUG] FW: Chronology View

Gerald,

I understand how Legacy (not the computer, because this is a software 
issue, not a hardware issue) sorts the Chronology View. However, it 
apparently does not have a code to provide an option to mimic the sort 
order I prefer in the data entry page for an individual.

Donald Quigley

Escondido, CA

Quigley Doyle Family Tree 

*From:*gerald [mailto:g...@representative.com]
*Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 8:56 AM
*To:* Don Quigley mailto:dwquig...@cox.net>>
*Subject:* Re: [LegacyUG] Chronology View

It does sort properly. But you seem not to understand how computers 
see things -- and it is not the way WE see things.

In a list of dates as you have, which do you think comes first: July 
4, 1850 or 1850. Obviously, it sorts by year first, and since 1850 is 
all alone with nothing else attached to it, it is first. Then later, 
it will look at all the additional information. It cannot tell WHEN in 
1850 it should go, so it comes to the top of the list. When you have a 
month, that comes next, and later, the day itself. So yes, it is all 
sorted according to the rules of data sorting as was established in 
the very beginning of time. It is only YOU that seems to think 
differently. THAT is where the proble