Hmm - I have never saved it to anything other than a Legacy gedcom, but then
again I don't remember seeing the problem for some time now. I have a couple of
Source Writer sources only now because they don't transfer to gedcom well.
Regards,
Jennifer
http://colston-wenck.com
-Original Mess
Then you probably saved it as a "Standard" Gedcom and did not save it as a
"Legacy Gedcom". The reason I know is because I have had the I and I before.
The I and I does that when you save it to another program. However, when I
saved it as for use with Legacy and uploaded it to my website I do
I tried this and it says that there are no matches, in either direction. But
it doesn't work for other JPG documents (images of censuses, etc.) either.
Only for JPG files that are actually photos. I don't know if this makes a
difference or not but they are in different folders.
Mary
-Or
Yes, I was talking about events, but not across sources.
Keeping with the census example, and example, let's say it was for a
married couple. I currently do not create separate events for each
spouse, but instead add one event to the marriage. (I suppose this
could be a form of lumping vs splitti
Could someone explain the difference between lumping and splitting? I
believe the original poster was referring to events.
Lisa
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Dennis M. Kowallek wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 22:30:17 -, "Ron Ferguson"
> wrote:
>
> >I am, and always have been, a lumper.
On 13/01/2011 22:41, Dennis M. Kowallek wrote:
> I'm not sure if the OP is talking about lumping sources, or limping
> events/facts. There would be a difference.
The fact that the post began "Not talking sources here." is a bit of a
giveaway!
FWIW, I would not lump facts from different sources in
Dennis,
Having reread the post, I think you are correct, and he means Events - not
really sure how one can lump them though!
Ron Ferguson
http://www.fergys.co.uk/
-Original Message-
From: Dennis M. Kowallek
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:41 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Sub
James:
While I lean toward lumping where sources are concerned, I'd tend to go the
other way with events. If I understand your question correctly, you're saying
that, with a census record for example, you'd simply show that as a single
event rather than extrapolating other events from it such
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 17:41:07 -0500, Dennis M. Kowallek
wrote:
>limping
aka lumping
--
Dennis Kowallek (LTools)
http://zippersoftware.com/ltools
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ltools
Legacy User Group guidelines:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
Archived messages after Nov.
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 22:30:17 -, "Ron Ferguson"
wrote:
>I am, and always have been, a lumper.
I'm not sure if the OP is talking about lumping sources, or limping
events/facts. There would be a difference.
--
Dennis Kowallek (LTools)
http://zippersoftware.com/ltools
http://groups.yahoo.com/g
James,
I am, and always have been, a lumper. I had to make some concessions when
Legacy introduced the Source Writer (if I wanted to use it), but nothing too
drastic, and there is no way that I will ever be a splitter. BUT this suits
me, and I am not suggesting for one minute that others should ch
Our first two webinar-on-CDs are now available to pre-order. See today's
announcement at http://tinyurl.com/6e9jecm. The Google for Genealogists
webinar is still free in the webinar archives at
www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/webinars.asp until February 5, 2011.
Thanks,
Geoff Rasmussen
Millennia Corpora
Just curious as to whether you are using Source Writer. I don't use it anymore
as the sources don't transfer properly to gedcom and my main publishing tool is
my website. I seem to remember those pesky \i and problems when I did use
Source Writer.
Regards,
Jennifer
http://colston-wenck.com
This is just me, but in my case, lumping developed some sources I
meant to get rid of. After a few months, I ended up taking a day and
going through my sources to get rid of the ones I no longer wanted.
Would splitting have prevented those unwanted sources? I would like to
think so; I am not sure.
Not talking sources here. I've not been consistent, and am working on
doing some cleanup of my data. For example, it's important to me to
keep track at an event level of an individuals appearance on the
census register. I use a census event, but a residence event would
serve my purposes just as
Syble,
If Legacy is installed as recommended by Legacy then you should see it by
going to Start>Computer and click the C Drive bar. There should be a Legacy
Folder there with its (and your) stuff in it.
One thing I didn't ask was whether you are running your user name with
administration rights.
To clarify, the formatting codes I wish to get rid of *mostly* show in
the TITL tag. Dropping TITL will remove probably 90% of them. There
are still a few others I wish to remove.
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:22 AM, James Cook wrote:
> It started with getting rid of formatting codes, but found I
It started with getting rid of formatting codes, but found I could not
get rid of those.
I found that the ABBR tag has what I want in it w/o any formatting, so
thought I'd drop TITL and rename ABBR to TITL in it's place. But, I
can't get rid of TITL (at least not via Legacy) either.
Having taken
James,
Is your problem that you wish to get rid of the TITL tag or you wish to get
rid of the formatting codes? If the latter then this is a known bug.
Ron Ferguson
http://www.fergys.co.uk
-Original Message-
From: James Cook
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 3:53 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@Le
Can't remember if I tried for Legacy. Will try that.
Yes, the source option was unchecked.
I also unchecked the option to keep formatting characters, but the
same problem TITL tag still includes either \i's or depending on
if I want to convert formatting to HTML.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:32
Have you looked at solution by error number?
I had not, but did, I followed their instructions, downloaded with antivirus
off and reinstalled it., changed UAC setting as they instructed (I'm a little
concerned with that, am I putting my computer at risk?)
I had used a fresh install on the new
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 04:43:07 -0700, Kathy Meyer
wrote:
>When we install new updates, does the program automatically go through
>some of those file maintenance functions?
No.
--
Dennis Kowallek (LTools)
http://zippersoftware.com/ltools
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ltools
Legacy User Group g
When we install new updates, does the program automatically go through
some of those file maintenance functions?
Kathy
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Sherry/Support
wrote:
> Good suggestion Dave!
>
> And don't forget to regularly do File > File Maintenance >
> Check/Repair. That does compact
23 matches
Mail list logo
