Version 3.7.0.0 Released

Success at last with beta7, csv file exported and loaded into Excel successfully. Thank you Alexander.

When the file is exported, do we still need all of the columns and might there be a better order?
The 4 columns Ind ID, Fam ID, Short Code, Include are of no real interest to the recipient.
Perhaps the Census and Relation Type columns should be swapped and a new column of Ahnentafel inserted between them.
That would then give the recipient all the information in the order in which it will be needed for insertion into the Ancestors page of LC.

Sorry not to have made these suggestions before.

 

Woops, I forgot that year of census is needed as first column when entering data into LC.

 

Beta9 looks good. Thank you. I will have to get back to you about the new Census Reference reports when I have looked into them further.

The column ordering in the online report is fine to help with preparing a referral to a new potential member. This was the original purpose of the report.

I only suggested a different order for the exported file to help with an existing member entering the data on their LC Ancestors page.
That is why I also requested Ahnentafel as an extra column, if it is available, in case the recipient did not know the appropriate value.

I am willing to hear other members views/suggestions on this, if any are interested (care a hoot ).

 

Interesting. I thought that I had considered Ahnentafel adequately.

When a LC member enters a Direct Relative on their Ancestors page, they are asked for the Ahnentafel Number relative to them. That is what I expected the exported file to contain, relative to the intended recipient. That value might not be known to the recipient until they have entered the details into their tree and possibly not even then.

I agree with your reasoning when the referral is being made to a potential LC member. In that case the referral details are sent from LC rather than FTA.

When the report from FTA is sent as a csv file to an existing member then I would expect the recipient to be represented in the originator's tree. In my case, I intend to send a file of about 50 individuals to my 4th cousin who only has a few of his family recorded on LC. I hope that having more details in a form which assists the entry to LC will act as a spur. If such action succeeds then I would certainly recommend the use of FTA to determine further Ahnentafel Numbers and other information.

 

I did mean recipient as I was not expecting the sender to initiate the transfer of information without having such details in their tree already. In my case, the match between trees was made in a side branch of mine with the common ancestor unknown to LC.

I am appreciative of other people's privacy concerns and have no wish to intrude but as published census information is over 100 years old I am unlikely to antagonise any living relatives. I am mearly trying to make life as easy as possible for my cousin, if he would like to extend his tree and enter further details on his LC Ancestors page. He may have lost interest since his initial recordings in which case that will be the end of the matter.

I asked for the export csv file for a particular purpose and not one that everyone would necessarily require. However, anyone else wishing to help a relative in a similar way to me would probably not attempt this manually. I hope this file will be useful to others.

 

The new Census Reference reports are identifying errors already!
I was expecting these to be blank after my massive clean up of sources. However, two reports show anomalies.

There are four rows in the Blank Census Reference report. I was about to blame FTA (again) but this time the program is absolutely correct.
Thank you Alexander. The GEDCOM contains a RESI instead of a CENS in one year each for four individuals but my sources are all defined as census so I must follow up elsewhere. I cannot see a significant difference between the data for instances of RESI and CENS.

The other surprise was to find about a dozen entries on the Unrecognised Census Reference report. I look forward to reading the help for this when your documentation team is able to catch up with all the changes as I am struggling to understand.

BTW, a quick starter for ten, what does the Preferred column indicate?

 

I have had to remove the small window print (from ALT+PRTSC) as I get a forum error that the message is too long.
Unknown Census Ref: Class: RG10; Piece: 3730; Folio: 26; Page: 6;
Unknown Census Ref: Piece 435, Folio 51, Page 40
plus 9 others similar to 2 above.

If I get much more of this I may give up too.
Rows 1 and 6 are for Wife and Husband. I can't see anything wrong with these references.
The remaining rows I thought I had changed but obviously somethings remain hidden and then come out of the woodwork unexpectedly.
":" and ";" must be the appearance that something has escaped (like wornholes) and will be the death of me yet - K.I.S.S.

 

That makes sense. I always prefer not to have a birth fact calculated in preference to a fact of a calculated birth.

How about "Uses of cranial artefact for demolition of masonry edifice"? (sorry, I can't find Tim's 'smiley' and now time has run out.)

 

Alexander, you are a star. Thank you for your efforts.

Sorry if I seemed to be getting at you earlier but it was just frustration at not being able to see clearly what I must do to avoid problems. If only all program authors were as responsive as you.

You are probably on a hiding to nothing in trying to cater for all possible variations of census reference and that is why I didn't ask for my format to be added to what must be becoming a very long list. Now if I can just find where those unmodified sources are hiding . . .

BTW, I have found my cousin's email address and it is still valid! He has asked me to send him the Referral Report details so now we get a chance to receive real live feedback about this approach. Don't hold your breath in case it takes a while.