Brett:
It's difficult to properly explain some of these sourcing issues, but I believe
you're mistaken regarding repeating notes and details. If you want to repeat
information from a Master Source, you simply select that Master Source. If you
want to repeat both the Master Source and Detail p
How do I change the sex of a same sex marriage spouse from female to male?
Joan L.
Potsdam, NY
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 messa
Lisa:
OK, here we go on the "splitting vs lumping" discussion. With Legacy you *can*
have a Master Source titled "1870 US Census, Virginia, District 27, Montgomery,
Auburn, p17." You can attach your image to that Master Source, and you can add
any details you want on the Master Source Detail
Joan Lalonde wrote:
> How do I change the sex of a same sex marriage spouse from female to
> male?
>
> Joan L.
> Potsdam, NY
>
Joan,
>From within Legacy, you cannot!
I ubderstand it is possible by exporting the couple to a GEDCOM and amending
the details and reimporting it can be done, but I hav
Thank you. I'll try the archives, and editing the gedcom.
Joan L.
- Original Message -
From: "Ron Ferguson"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 4:26 AM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] how do I change sex of spouse
Joan Lalonde wrote:
> How do I change the sex of a same sex marriage spouse fro
This is not possible in Legacy. Some users have asked for this option
for a very long time, but others don't want this option (no discussion
please ;-)
See: http://www.moss-fritch.com/legacy.htm this is about version 5 and
6, but also true for version 7.
Evert
2010/4/13 Joan Lalonde :
> How do I
Commonly used given names, shown in quotes in the given name field of the
Family screen, can be hidden in the basic descendant and pedigree charts and
used in report narratives, by checking the two boxes in the Report Options
under Format, "Use quoted names in narratives" and "Remove quoted given
n
My friend recently updated to the latest version but I did not because I
am working on a project that I want to complete first but...
Once my friend updated, she when she chooses Twin, Stillborn, etc from
the children's settings, it no longer appears after the name of the
child anymore. I
Laura Johnson wrote:
> My friend recently updated to the latest version but I did not
> because I am working on a project that I want to complete first
> but...
>
> Once my friend updated, she when she chooses Twin, Stillborn, etc from
> the children's settings, it no longer appears after t
Options > Customize > View > Checkbox: Show Status on Family View..On
Children
Bert
- Original Message -
From: "Laura Johnson"
To:
Sent: Tuesday 13 April 2010 12:16
Subject: [LegacyUG] Twin, Stillborn, Etc
My friend recently updated to the latest version but I did not because I
am wo
They are already listed in the Status box. They do NOT appear next to
the child's name when you go back to the listing of the children for
that family like they did before.
Ron Ferguson wrote:
> Laura Johnson wrote:
>
>> My friend recently updated to the latest version but I did not
>> because I
Yes! Brett, that's exactly what I mean.
I just remembered what might be the correct terminology... I think that in FTM, the sources are in a TABLE and the way that they are listed is a TABLE LOOKUP. Something like that. So, maybe Legacy doesn't have the sources stored as a TABLE. That would expl
Good morning, Kirsten:Thank you for all of your time devoted to this issue.
I just sent a post explaining that I just remembered from my Database Administrator days, (a long time ago...) that the sources in FTM must have been stored as a TABLE. That must explain the difference.
I do like Legacy
As Bert wrote earlier: Options > Customize > View Tab - View status on
Family View select On children
Evert
2010/4/13 Laura Johnson :
> They are already listed in the Status box. They do NOT appear next to
> the child's name when you go back to the listing of the children for
> that family like t
Lisa,
In common with other genealogy programs Legacy is a Database and is in fact an
Access database, so everything is stored in tables.
Yes Legacy does work differently to FTM, and I haven't previously commented
because I am not sufficiently familiar with the latter. I do know that the two
ar
Lisa, fair warning, it's a lot like the BORG around here - "Resistance
Is Futile. You Will Be Assimilated!"
I, like you, do not like that the only option we are given for Source
Details is to paste separate copies all around to every
individual/event. I did not grasp this point at first, and it c
wrote
>I just sent a post explaining that I just remembered from my Database
>Administrator days, (a long time ago...) that the sources in FTM must
>have been stored as a TABLE. That must explain the difference.
>I do like Legacy, but I will recommend that they change the way that
>they store sou
James Cook wrote
>Maybe an example will help clarify what I'm trying to point out here:
>Say you've used a birth certificate as the source for name, birth, and
>relationship to parents, and you've used the Source Clipboard to paste
>that source into each of the four events. If you run a report, al
In the Individual's Information Page where the person's Burial is
changed to Cremated, how do I search for a list of all cremations? I
have looked through the list of search options but cannot
find cremated anywhere.
Lloyd
Penny Stock
What I really want is one source = one source detail. I don't want
all the extra workarounds to get that to happen. Plus, I think there
is too much risk in your Replace All option.
Something I've ran into a number of times, and can't believe I'm the
only one
I've got a document that has a nu
Ron~
A question regarding your comment pertaining to copying a source, with
specific details to the clipboard. I have found the clipbaord useful for
copying the source to multiple individuals, with one exception. After
pasting the clipboard source to an individual, if I alter the text/comments
s
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:19:46 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>What I really want is one source = one source detail.
I think your only solution is to move all the detail info to the master
source itself (don't know how this approach would work with SW). What
you are asking for has been discussed for yea
Is there any way of tagging individuals with the same birth date? I want to
check that I have set the status as 'Twin'
Peter Abbott
Legacy User Group guidelines:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyuse
Lisa, I'm not being clear either, as others have apparently also missed what I
was trying to explain.
You can do what you're asking in Legacy, IMO. It will be different than how
you did it in FTM, but I'm at a loss for how a couple of mouse clicks is
"clunky." So let me try again.
First, b
I have found an answer in Ltools. I should have checked there before posting
my question.
Peter Abbott
Legacy User Group guidelines:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/
Arch
I go one step further in identifying my Unknown UNKNOWNS.
Unknown James Smith's 1sr Wife UNKNOWN
Unknown Margaret Gibson's 5th Husband Johnson
Beverly George Covington's Wife UNKNOWN
Thus, when I list the UNKNOWNS I am able to identify to whom the are attached.
Hope this helps !
Apologies. Test. Trying to get back on the LUG again. -Robert
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 N
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Dennis M. Kowallek wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:19:46 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>
>>What I really want is one source = one source detail.
> What you are asking for has been discussed for years and I don't see this
> changing any time soon (if at all).
You are
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:31:05 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>> Is there other genie software that does it this way?
>
>FTM?
Is there a data model or a fact sheet available somewhere that would
elaborate on this?
--
Dennis Kowallek (LTools)
http://zippersoftware.com/ltools
http://groups.yahoo.com/gro
When recording detail information in the the subject source template, the
output does not include the information I enter in the Item Type field.
For example, I've entered "Return of marriages in the county of Hillsdale"
in Item Type, but it doesn't show up in the resulting citation:
Michigan, Re
Judy,
I haven't. As far as I know it has always worked like this, and to be honest
I prefer it. Often when adding a comment I will wish to use it again, for
example if I use a child's birth certificate to establish the parents I will
use it for both the father and mother.
I know it is there, so
Go here:
http://www.familytreemaker.com/Support/PatchDetails.aspx
Look for "Link To Existing Source-Citation"
Best I can do.
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Dennis M. Kowallek wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:31:05 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>
>>> Is there other genie software that does it this wa
Thanks Ron.
Not exactly what I wanted to hear, but I can live with it. I consider
myself a splitter, so if I have a source say - 1880 Federal Population
Census of Michigan (which never changes) I can select it from my Master
Source list, and use it as a specific source for (say in one case, the h
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:41:01 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Dennis M. Kowallek wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:31:05 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>>
Is there other genie software that does it this way?
>>>
>>>FTM?
>>
>> Is there a data model or a fact sheet availab
Judy:
I use roughly the same method as you, but with a slight difference. I
transcribe the listing for the entire family in the Details and then attach
that source to each member of the family. It's the same amount of typing, and
avoids the problem of having to create what is essentially a di
Legacy is somehow associating an individual with a Source Detail via
Id's in some table someplace, right?
The only difference I really see is that Legacy forces a copy of
Source Detail, so that each association has a brand new ID that ties
them together. If you read that info. I pointed to, FTM al
Sounds good, Kirsten. I may give it a try to see how it prints out.
Thanks.
Judy
- Original Message -
From: "Kirsten Bowman"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 4:35 PM
Subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: [LegacyUG] Source Detail was (correction re: Show
List)
Judy:
I use roughly the same meth
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:48:32 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>Legacy is somehow associating an individual with a Source Detail via
>Id's in some table someplace, right?
No, the Source Detail record depicts the relationship between an
individual (let's say a birthdate) and a Master Source. If you look a
You cannot withing Legacy. Legacy does not support same-sex marriages
there is a work around explained here that you can use if you have a
copy of MS Access. http://www.moss-fritch.com/legacy.htm
Brian
Customer Support
Millennia Corporation
br...@legacyfamilytree.com
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.co
Hi James:
Excellent!
Thank you.
I'll have to notify Legacy of our feelings.
Lisa Caldwell GarrettApr 13, 2010 08:43:48 AM, LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com wrote:
Lisa, fair warning, it's a lot like the BORG around here - "ResistanceIs Futile. You Will Be Assimilated!"I, like you, do not like th
Hi Jenny:
And I agree. The reason that I switched from FTM to Legacy is that Legacy is much better. However, this issue is an important one. I have also seen others discuss this on the internet.
The post before yours from James may explain some of the drawbacks that I have been speaking of.
Thank
Hmm... Seems a bit odd to me, but if that's how it is, you are right,
it would take a new table to make this happen. Would be worth while
IMO still.
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Dennis M. Kowallek wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:48:32 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>
>>Legacy is somehow associat
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:10:21 -0500, James Cook wrote:
>Would be worth while
>IMO still.
Maybe for a few people out there like yourself. But that would add
another layer of complexity to Legacy sourcing ... which seems hard
enough for many newbies to grasp. It don't matter to me since I am
conten
43 matches
Mail list logo
