I have a problem I created for myself!
I use two genealogy programs. I might update either one and export a
gedcom for use by the other program. But, program #1 lists NAME as an
event and provides for a SOURCE - program #2 does not.
The problem occurred when I updated #2 using a gedcom from #1, created
a gedcom in #2 and imported it into #1. The NAME and SOURCE
transferred as UNSPECIFIED and SOURCE.
I see no way to globally change from UNSPECIFIED/SOUCE to NAME/SOURCE
or even globally delete the UNSPECIFIED entry (which might be
valuable).
The simplest method would be to forget sourcing names but that doesn't
seem wise particularly if the name is the only entry for a person.
I don't recall if the other programs I have tried provide for sourcing
names or not. Is sourciing names important?
Hugh
Problem
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:54:55 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
person, then it is important.
If GEDCOM Explorer doesn't work, you can always try simply editing the
GEDCOM using Word or some other word processor.
Sullivan) wrote:
I have a problem I created for myself!
I use two genealogy programs. I might update either one and export a
gedcom for use by the other program. But, program #1 lists NAME as an
event and provides for a SOURCE - program #2 does not.
The problem occurred when I updated #2 using a gedcom from #1, created
a gedcom in #2 and imported it into #1. The NAME and SOURCE
transferred as UNSPECIFIED and SOURCE.
I see no way to globally change from UNSPECIFIED/SOUCE to NAME/SOURCE
or even globally delete the UNSPECIFIED entry (which might be
valuable).
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
The simplest method would be to forget sourcing names but that doesn't
seem wise particularly if the name is the only entry for a person.
I don't recall if the other programs I have tried provide for sourcing
names or not. Is sourciing names important?
As you say, it seem if that is the only source you have for that
person, then it is important.
Hugh
If GEDCOM Explorer doesn't work, you can always try simply editing the
GEDCOM using Word or some other word processor.
-
singhals
Re: Problem
J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
That's what you get for using all the nooks and crannies and bells and
whistles on your genie program, Hugh.
Just how big is this GED
anyway? Can you pull it into WORD or WP or WordPad or Claris or
whatever and do a find/replace? Dump your dodgy name-source into
NOTES/TEXT/MORE/ and go from there.
[It's my hobby horse, and I'm gonna ride it again : in data entry,
always always plan ahead for migration; when planning to migrate KISS --
that's Keep It Short and Stupid -- and have as few fields as humanly
possible. On my largest database, I've started repeating the personal
data in the NOTES/TEXT/Freetext field as extra insurance.]
Cheryl
I have a problem I created for myself!
I use two genealogy programs. I might update either one and export a
gedcom for use by the other program. But, program #1 lists NAME as an
event and provides for a SOURCE - program #2 does not.
The problem occurred when I updated #2 using a gedcom from #1, created
a gedcom in #2 and imported it into #1. The NAME and SOURCE
transferred as UNSPECIFIED and SOURCE.
I see no way to globally change from UNSPECIFIED/SOUCE to NAME/SOURCE
or even globally delete the UNSPECIFIED entry (which might be
valuable).
The simplest method would be to forget sourcing names but that doesn't
seem wise particularly if the name is the only entry for a person.
I don't recall if the other programs I have tried provide for sourcing
names or not. Is sourciing names important?
Hugh
That's what you get for using all the nooks and crannies and bells and
whistles on your genie program, Hugh.
Just how big is this GED anyway? Can you pull it into WORD or WP or WordPad or Claris or
whatever and do a find/replace? Dump your dodgy name-source into
NOTES/TEXT/MORE/ and go from there.
[It's my hobby horse, and I'm gonna ride it again : in data entry,
always always plan ahead for migration; when planning to migrate KISS --
that's Keep It Short and Stupid -- and have as few fields as humanly
possible. On my largest database, I've started repeating the personal
data in the NOTES/TEXT/Freetext field as extra insurance.]
Cheryl
-
J. Hugh Sullivan
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:36:37 -0400, singhals <[email protected]>
wrote:
It's almost 7,000 people. I don't follow spousal lines very far - too
many name changes.
Murphy knew what he was doing when he wrote his law!
Your thought of having as few fields as possible is interesting... But
doesn't that almost eliminate using sources? Or do you show sources in
the Notes, too?
Hugh
wrote:
J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
I have a problem I created for myself!
I use two genealogy programs. I might update either one and export a
gedcom for use by the other program. But, program #1 lists NAME as an
event and provides for a SOURCE - program #2 does not.
The problem occurred when I updated #2 using a gedcom from #1, created
a gedcom in #2 and imported it into #1. The NAME and SOURCE
transferred as UNSPECIFIED and SOURCE.
I see no way to globally change from UNSPECIFIED/SOUCE to NAME/SOURCE
or even globally delete the UNSPECIFIED entry (which might be
valuable).
The simplest method would be to forget sourcing names but that doesn't
seem wise particularly if the name is the only entry for a person.
I don't recall if the other programs I have tried provide for sourcing
names or not. Is sourciing names important?
Hugh
That's what you get for using all the nooks and crannies and bells and
whistles on your genie program, Hugh.
anyway? Can you pull it into WORD or WP or WordPad or Claris or
whatever and do a find/replace? Dump your dodgy name-source into
NOTES/TEXT/MORE/ and go from there.
It's almost 7,000 people. I don't follow spousal lines very far - too
many name changes.
[It's my hobby horse, and I'm gonna ride it again : in data entry,
always always plan ahead for migration; when planning to migrate KISS --
that's Keep It Short and Stupid -- and have as few fields as humanly
possible. On my largest database, I've started repeating the personal
data in the NOTES/TEXT/Freetext field as extra insurance.]
Cheryl
Murphy knew what he was doing when he wrote his law!
Your thought of having as few fields as possible is interesting... But
doesn't that almost eliminate using sources? Or do you show sources in
the Notes, too?
Hugh
-
J. Hugh Sullivan
Re: Problem
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:16:06 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]>
wrote:
I'll take a look at that.
That has occurred to me but the file is large enough that I would
prefer a "global" correction.
And, if I decide to use the program which doesn't provide for sourcing
names I wouldn,t need to do anything.
Tnx for the GEDCOM Explorer suggestion.
Hugh
wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:54:55 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
I have a problem I created for myself!
I use two genealogy programs. I might update either one and export a
gedcom for use by the other program. But, program #1 lists NAME as an
event and provides for a SOURCE - program #2 does not.
The problem occurred when I updated #2 using a gedcom from #1, created
a gedcom in #2 and imported it into #1. The NAME and SOURCE
transferred as UNSPECIFIED and SOURCE.
I see no way to globally change from UNSPECIFIED/SOUCE to NAME/SOURCE
or even globally delete the UNSPECIFIED entry (which might be
valuable).
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
I'll take a look at that.
Hugh
If GEDCOM Explorer doesn't work, you can always try simply editing the
GEDCOM using Word or some other word processor.
That has occurred to me but the file is large enough that I would
prefer a "global" correction.
And, if I decide to use the program which doesn't provide for sourcing
names I wouldn,t need to do anything.
Tnx for the GEDCOM Explorer suggestion.
Hugh
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:23:05 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
I don't understand what you mean by global. I have a file in FTM with
27,000+ individuals. When I convert from FTM to RM via a GEDCOM, the
Social Security number field I use gets screwed up, because RM thinks
the "place" field is a place instead of the actual social security
number (FTM has no other place to put the number other than the place
field). So I wrote a simple macro in Word that converts all instances
of the SS# to an event, which then imports into RM correctly.
I use the same technique to correct a few other things that don't fit
the standard conversion (or my particular use of non-standard
"facts").
That seems global to me.
Sullivan) wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:16:06 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]
wrote:
snip
If GEDCOM Explorer doesn't work, you can always try simply editing the
GEDCOM using Word or some other word processor.
That has occurred to me but the file is large enough that I would
prefer a "global" correction.
Hugh
I don't understand what you mean by global. I have a file in FTM with
27,000+ individuals. When I convert from FTM to RM via a GEDCOM, the
Social Security number field I use gets screwed up, because RM thinks
the "place" field is a place instead of the actual social security
number (FTM has no other place to put the number other than the place
field). So I wrote a simple macro in Word that converts all instances
of the SS# to an event, which then imports into RM correctly.
I use the same technique to correct a few other things that don't fit
the standard conversion (or my particular use of non-standard
"facts").
That seems global to me.
-
Andy.III
Re: Problem
That's what you get for using all the nooks and crannies and bells and
whistles on your genie program, Hugh.
anyway? Can you pull it into WORD or WP or WordPad or Claris or
whatever and do a find/replace? Dump your dodgy name-source into
NOTES/TEXT/MORE/ and go from there.
[It's my hobby horse, and I'm gonna ride it again : in data entry,
always always plan ahead for migration; when planning to migrate KISS --
that's Keep It Short and Stupid -- and have as few fields as humanly
possible. On my largest database, I've started repeating the personal
data in the NOTES/TEXT/Freetext field as extra insurance.]
Cheryl
Yep!
I run an Individual Narrative Report on each person and then copy that into a
note tag dated 01-01-2999 so it is always the last thing on the person.. and if
I edit or change something on a person I redo it right then and there to be
sure if worse comes to worse I can always use it for data input
Andy.III
--
VOTE 2004
Defeat Reichthuglican Christofascism !!
-
J. Hugh Sullivan
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:46:44 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]>
wrote:
That is global - correct every incorrect instance with one command.
Hugh
wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:23:05 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:16:06 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]
wrote:
snip
If GEDCOM Explorer doesn't work, you can always try simply editing the
GEDCOM using Word or some other word processor.
That has occurred to me but the file is large enough that I would
prefer a "global" correction.
Hugh
I don't understand what you mean by global. I have a file in FTM with
27,000+ individuals. When I convert from FTM to RM via a GEDCOM, the
Social Security number field I use gets screwed up, because RM thinks
the "place" field is a place instead of the actual social security
number (FTM has no other place to put the number other than the place
field). So I wrote a simple macro in Word that converts all instances
of the SS# to an event, which then imports into RM correctly.
I use the same technique to correct a few other things that don't fit
the standard conversion (or my particular use of non-standard
"facts").
That seems global to me.
That is global - correct every incorrect instance with one command.
Hugh
-
J. Hugh Sullivan
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:46:44 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]>
wrote:
I do a Box Chart Report at least once each year with names and
selected events word-wrapped not to exceed one or two lines. The
report is about 175 pages long including index. I also do a Descendant
Narrative Report for my direct line.
Since you have almost 5 times the number of people in your data base,
what reports do you periodically do and how may pages are they?
Hugh
wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:23:05 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
That has occurred to me but the file is large enough that I would
prefer a "global" correction.
Hugh
I don't understand what you mean by global. I have a file in FTM with
27,000+ individuals.
I do a Box Chart Report at least once each year with names and
selected events word-wrapped not to exceed one or two lines. The
report is about 175 pages long including index. I also do a Descendant
Narrative Report for my direct line.
Since you have almost 5 times the number of people in your data base,
what reports do you periodically do and how may pages are they?
Hugh
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 17:39:54 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
I don't do any reports that would involve all, or even nearly all, of
the people in my database. My data consists of really 3 "sets" of
data; My Mother's ancestors (Acadian), My Father's ancestors (mixed
but lots of French & German), and the Hoffpauir line, starting with
the original Hoffpauir and all his descendants (a lot of people since
he was born in about the mid 1700's).
The largest reports I've generated have been from within FTM, a
descendant book in NFS Quarterly style starting with that original
Hoffpauir. It runs 1600+ pages including hte source list and index. If
you're curious, you can view a copy on my web site. I also have
generated a PDF "chart" of all of the descendants.... It makes a
pretty large PDF file, 9.5 MB in size. If printed, the report would
consist of 210 pages, each 2 ft x 10 ft. (with very small print).
I have never printed either of these reports to paper, but they are
included on the Family CD that the Hoffpauir Family Association sells,
so it's possible that some relatives have actually printed one of them
out. I'm certain that the smaller version of the descendant book (no
sources or notes) has been printed several times. It contains the same
names, but is only about 700 pages,
Sullivan) wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:46:44 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]
wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:23:05 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
That has occurred to me but the file is large enough that I would
prefer a "global" correction.
Hugh
I don't understand what you mean by global. I have a file in FTM with
27,000+ individuals.
I do a Box Chart Report at least once each year with names and
selected events word-wrapped not to exceed one or two lines. The
report is about 175 pages long including index. I also do a Descendant
Narrative Report for my direct line.
Since you have almost 5 times the number of people in your data base,
what reports do you periodically do and how may pages are they?
Hugh
I don't do any reports that would involve all, or even nearly all, of
the people in my database. My data consists of really 3 "sets" of
data; My Mother's ancestors (Acadian), My Father's ancestors (mixed
but lots of French & German), and the Hoffpauir line, starting with
the original Hoffpauir and all his descendants (a lot of people since
he was born in about the mid 1700's).
The largest reports I've generated have been from within FTM, a
descendant book in NFS Quarterly style starting with that original
Hoffpauir. It runs 1600+ pages including hte source list and index. If
you're curious, you can view a copy on my web site. I also have
generated a PDF "chart" of all of the descendants.... It makes a
pretty large PDF file, 9.5 MB in size. If printed, the report would
consist of 210 pages, each 2 ft x 10 ft. (with very small print).
I have never printed either of these reports to paper, but they are
included on the Family CD that the Hoffpauir Family Association sells,
so it's possible that some relatives have actually printed one of them
out. I'm certain that the smaller version of the descendant book (no
sources or notes) has been printed several times. It contains the same
names, but is only about 700 pages,
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:40:56 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]>
wrote:
<snip>
I just noticed that since transferring my newsreader to my new
computer, I no longer have a sig file activated, so my web site
address didn't show up.
FWIW, it's at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/
wrote:
<snip>
The largest reports I've generated have been from within FTM, a
descendant book in NFS Quarterly style starting with that original
Hoffpauir. It runs 1600+ pages including hte source list and index. If
you're curious, you can view a copy on my web site.
snip
I just noticed that since transferring my newsreader to my new
computer, I no longer have a sig file activated, so my web site
address didn't show up.
FWIW, it's at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/
-
Sherry
Re: Problem
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
<snip>
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
Sherry
news:[email protected]:
<snip>
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
snip
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
Sherry
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On 19 Oct 2004 20:25:17 GMT, Sherry <[email protected]> wrote:
sherry,
I had not tired to install GEDX since getting my new computer running,
so after I read your post, I tried to install it. Even though I have
all the necessary data saved (primary regisration number, secondary
registration number, order number, etc) I find exactly the situation
you described... it won't validate those numbers! So It would appear
that I am no longer abloe to run the program, at least not on this
computer. Maybe I'll have to try to keep the old one after all, since
I've now found one program that won't run on the new one.
I'm now wondering if it's possible to hack the program somehow, to get
it to accept valid registraton!
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
snip
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
snip
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
Sherry
sherry,
I had not tired to install GEDX since getting my new computer running,
so after I read your post, I tried to install it. Even though I have
all the necessary data saved (primary regisration number, secondary
registration number, order number, etc) I find exactly the situation
you described... it won't validate those numbers! So It would appear
that I am no longer abloe to run the program, at least not on this
computer. Maybe I'll have to try to keep the old one after all, since
I've now found one program that won't run on the new one.
I'm now wondering if it's possible to hack the program somehow, to get
it to accept valid registraton!
-
J. Hugh Sullivan
Re: Problem
On 19 Oct 2004 20:25:17 GMT, Sherry <[email protected]> wrote:
I noticed the unavailability also. But I doubt that it would have had
any effect on my problem.
And, while you're here, Sherry, any ideas how I can get several
thousand UNSPECIFIED events ported back to NAME?
Interestingly I have since learned that the sources do print for the
name on both programs even though one does not provide for it in
events and the other has the incorrect event label.
I also note that more than one event (in a few cases) is now listed as
UNSPECIFIED.
Hugh
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
snip
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
snip
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
Sherry
I noticed the unavailability also. But I doubt that it would have had
any effect on my problem.
And, while you're here, Sherry, any ideas how I can get several
thousand UNSPECIFIED events ported back to NAME?
Interestingly I have since learned that the sources do print for the
name on both programs even though one does not provide for it in
events and the other has the incorrect event label.
I also note that more than one event (in a few cases) is now listed as
UNSPECIFIED.
Hugh
-
J. Hugh Sullivan
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:50:58 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]>
wrote:
Comprende.
My info is not published and I have no plans to do so. I plan to
continue exchanging one-on-one with family. I also am asked to meet
with new family from time to time and I take the reports with me. I
get and give a lot of data in those meetings - but I only give their
direct line. I enjoy meeting family - you don't always get to do that
if you publish.
I don't care if they only have one generation and I have twelve - I
consider it an even swap.
Hugh
wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:40:56 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]
wrote:
snip
The largest reports I've generated have been from within FTM, a
descendant book in NFS Quarterly style starting with that original
Hoffpauir. It runs 1600+ pages including hte source list and index. If
you're curious, you can view a copy on my web site.
snip
I just noticed that since transferring my newsreader to my new
computer, I no longer have a sig file activated, so my web site
address didn't show up.
FWIW, it's at http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/
Comprende.
My info is not published and I have no plans to do so. I plan to
continue exchanging one-on-one with family. I also am asked to meet
with new family from time to time and I take the reports with me. I
get and give a lot of data in those meetings - but I only give their
direct line. I enjoy meeting family - you don't always get to do that
if you publish.
I don't care if they only have one generation and I have twelve - I
consider it an even swap.
Hugh
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Problem
Sherry wrote:
There one in the SSDI who died 21 Oct 2001. I wonder if that's him.
Bob
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
snip
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
snip
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
There one in the SSDI who died 21 Oct 2001. I wonder if that's him.
Bob
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:22:05 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
Yes, I operated like that for several years, and got a lot of good
data and met some very interesting distant relatives (some of whom I
make it a point not to see agin <g>). But I was in a situation where
there had been genealogy books published years ago that "had it
wrong". It started as so many family histories do "Three brothers came
to this country....", even though we found solid records indicating
only one male originator of the family line. So I decided it would
have more weight if I simply gave the information away... and it has
been a huge success. So much so that the Family Association, which
used to print and sell the "old" story, has now produced and sells a
CD with the current information, complete with the source information
supporting the facts.
Our family (the Hoffpauirs) is probably kind of unique in that we were
located in SW Louisiana for several of the early generations.
Consequently, many of the marriages, even today, are between distant
cousins, and it's almost a hobby for people to be interested in "just
how am I related to Dave's wife's brother". Hence, the need for the
descendant report form the original Hoffpauir.
Sullivan) wrote:
Comprende.
My info is not published and I have no plans to do so. I plan to
continue exchanging one-on-one with family. I also am asked to meet
with new family from time to time and I take the reports with me. I
get and give a lot of data in those meetings - but I only give their
direct line. I enjoy meeting family - you don't always get to do that
if you publish.
I don't care if they only have one generation and I have twelve - I
consider it an even swap.
Hugh
Yes, I operated like that for several years, and got a lot of good
data and met some very interesting distant relatives (some of whom I
make it a point not to see agin <g>). But I was in a situation where
there had been genealogy books published years ago that "had it
wrong". It started as so many family histories do "Three brothers came
to this country....", even though we found solid records indicating
only one male originator of the family line. So I decided it would
have more weight if I simply gave the information away... and it has
been a huge success. So much so that the Family Association, which
used to print and sell the "old" story, has now produced and sells a
CD with the current information, complete with the source information
supporting the facts.
Our family (the Hoffpauirs) is probably kind of unique in that we were
located in SW Louisiana for several of the early generations.
Consequently, many of the marriages, even today, are between distant
cousins, and it's almost a hobby for people to be interested in "just
how am I related to Dave's wife's brother". Hence, the need for the
descendant report form the original Hoffpauir.
-
Dave Hinz
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:52:24 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote:
That would explain why he's not answering email and paying his hosting
and domain fees...
Sherry wrote:
Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
There one in the SSDI who died 21 Oct 2001. I wonder if that's him.
That would explain why he's not answering email and paying his hosting
and domain fees...
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Problem
Charlie wrote:
If that program is sitting in the folder C::\Program Files\Gedx? you might
try just overwriting the files there in the new computer with the ones from
the old which would be validated if it's a file mod. It might also be
someething that is put in the Windows Registry. Click Start-Run, enter
Regedit, then OK. Look but don't make any changes unless you know what you
are doing and have backed it up. Just do a Search for GedX and look for
possibilities.
Bob
On 19 Oct 2004 20:25:17 GMT, Sherry <[email protected]> wrote:
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
snip
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
snip
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
Sherry
sherry,
I had not tired to install GEDX since getting my new computer running,
so after I read your post, I tried to install it. Even though I have
all the necessary data saved (primary regisration number, secondary
registration number, order number, etc) I find exactly the situation
you described... it won't validate those numbers! So It would appear
that I am no longer abloe to run the program, at least not on this
computer. Maybe I'll have to try to keep the old one after all, since
I've now found one program that won't run on the new one.
I'm now wondering if it's possible to hack the program somehow, to get
it to accept valid registraton!
If that program is sitting in the folder C::\Program Files\Gedx? you might
try just overwriting the files there in the new computer with the ones from
the old which would be validated if it's a file mod. It might also be
someething that is put in the Windows Registry. Click Start-Run, enter
Regedit, then OK. Look but don't make any changes unless you know what you
are doing and have backed it up. Just do a Search for GedX and look for
possibilities.
Bob
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:52:24 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]>
wrote:
That couldn't be him... I got my last email message from Gary on 31
May 2003. Someone said that Gary was in the military service and was
posted overseas, but AFAIK, that's just a rumor.
wrote:
Sherry wrote:
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
snip
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
snip
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
There one in the SSDI who died 21 Oct 2001. I wonder if that's him.
Bob
That couldn't be him... I got my last email message from Gary on 31
May 2003. Someone said that Gary was in the military service and was
posted overseas, but AFAIK, that's just a rumor.
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:05:06 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]>
wrote:
Thanks, that just might work, I'll set the old computer up and look
for registry entries, and also try copying the files over to the new
computer.
wrote:
Charlie wrote:
On 19 Oct 2004 20:25:17 GMT, Sherry <[email protected]> wrote:
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
snip
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
snip
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
Sherry
sherry,
I had not tired to install GEDX since getting my new computer running,
so after I read your post, I tried to install it. Even though I have
all the necessary data saved (primary regisration number, secondary
registration number, order number, etc) I find exactly the situation
you described... it won't validate those numbers! So It would appear
that I am no longer abloe to run the program, at least not on this
computer. Maybe I'll have to try to keep the old one after all, since
I've now found one program that won't run on the new one.
I'm now wondering if it's possible to hack the program somehow, to get
it to accept valid registraton!
If that program is sitting in the folder C::\Program Files\Gedx? you might
try just overwriting the files there in the new computer with the ones from
the old which would be validated if it's a file mod. It might also be
someething that is put in the Windows Registry. Click Start-Run, enter
Regedit, then OK. Look but don't make any changes unless you know what you
are doing and have backed it up. Just do a Search for GedX and look for
possibilities.
Bob
Bob,
Thanks, that just might work, I'll set the old computer up and look
for registry entries, and also try copying the files over to the new
computer.
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Problem
The first one I posted seems to have disappeared!
Sherry wrote:
There's one in the SSDI who died 21 Oct 2001. I wonder if that's him.
Bob
Sherry wrote:
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
snip
Have you tried using GEDCOM Explorer?
snip
Gedcom Explorer is no more. And I'm really frustrated about it because
the $25 registration required connecting to their server to validate -
I had to reinstall Windows XP after purchasing the program and now I
can't use it because the server is gone, kaput and no more. Can't get
a peep out of Gary Bonham - I even forwarded a message to him through
his server hosting and never heard back from him. I see that gedx.com
is now up for sale.
Great program, but feeling very irritated at the way registered
customers were left hanging.
There's one in the SSDI who died 21 Oct 2001. I wonder if that's him.
Bob
-
singhals
Re: Problem
J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
I usually do the parents of the spouse and darn little else in my big
database.
Yeah; any sourcing I feel necessary to include is in the NOTES. And
after my publishing fantasmagoria, I've even started making sure the
whole thing flows in a reasonable narrative format. (g) As I mentioned
a bit back, I've found that during disaster recovery TEXT is more often
recoverable in a usable format that databases etc. PRINT TO FILE is one
EXCELLENT invention. (g)
Cheryl
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:36:37 -0400, singhals <[email protected]
wrote:
J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
I have a problem I created for myself!
I use two genealogy programs. I might update either one and export a
gedcom for use by the other program. But, program #1 lists NAME as an
event and provides for a SOURCE - program #2 does not.
The problem occurred when I updated #2 using a gedcom from #1, created
a gedcom in #2 and imported it into #1. The NAME and SOURCE
transferred as UNSPECIFIED and SOURCE.
I see no way to globally change from UNSPECIFIED/SOUCE to NAME/SOURCE
or even globally delete the UNSPECIFIED entry (which might be
valuable).
The simplest method would be to forget sourcing names but that doesn't
seem wise particularly if the name is the only entry for a person.
I don't recall if the other programs I have tried provide for sourcing
names or not. Is sourciing names important?
Hugh
That's what you get for using all the nooks and crannies and bells and
whistles on your genie program, Hugh.
anyway? Can you pull it into WORD or WP or WordPad or Claris or
whatever and do a find/replace? Dump your dodgy name-source into
NOTES/TEXT/MORE/ and go from there.
It's almost 7,000 people. I don't follow spousal lines very far - too
many name changes.
I usually do the parents of the spouse and darn little else in my big
database.
[It's my hobby horse, and I'm gonna ride it again : in data entry,
always always plan ahead for migration; when planning to migrate KISS --
that's Keep It Short and Stupid -- and have as few fields as humanly
possible. On my largest database, I've started repeating the personal
data in the NOTES/TEXT/Freetext field as extra insurance.]
Cheryl
Murphy knew what he was doing when he wrote his law!
Your thought of having as few fields as possible is interesting... But
doesn't that almost eliminate using sources? Or do you show sources in
the Notes, too?
Hugh
Yeah; any sourcing I feel necessary to include is in the NOTES. And
after my publishing fantasmagoria, I've even started making sure the
whole thing flows in a reasonable narrative format. (g) As I mentioned
a bit back, I've found that during disaster recovery TEXT is more often
recoverable in a usable format that databases etc. PRINT TO FILE is one
EXCELLENT invention. (g)
Cheryl
-
J. Hugh Sullivan
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:58:08 -0500, Charlie <[email protected]>
wrote:
No one knows (for sure) where my gg grandfather came from. I think I
do but can't actually prove it. But the famous 3 brothers travelled to
gether to AL in 1835. Erroneous data has been furnished to LDS and all
over the internet. It's a familiar story.
Hugh
wrote:
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:22:05 GMT, [email protected] (J. Hugh
Sullivan) wrote:
Comprende.
My info is not published and I have no plans to do so. I plan to
continue exchanging one-on-one with family. I also am asked to meet
with new family from time to time and I take the reports with me. I
get and give a lot of data in those meetings - but I only give their
direct line. I enjoy meeting family - you don't always get to do that
if you publish.
I don't care if they only have one generation and I have twelve - I
consider it an even swap.
Hugh
Yes, I operated like that for several years, and got a lot of good
data and met some very interesting distant relatives (some of whom I
make it a point not to see agin <g>). But I was in a situation where
there had been genealogy books published years ago that "had it
wrong". It started as so many family histories do "Three brothers came
to this country....", even though we found solid records indicating
only one male originator of the family line. So I decided it would
have more weight if I simply gave the information away... and it has
been a huge success. So much so that the Family Association, which
used to print and sell the "old" story, has now produced and sells a
CD with the current information, complete with the source information
supporting the facts.
No one knows (for sure) where my gg grandfather came from. I think I
do but can't actually prove it. But the famous 3 brothers travelled to
gether to AL in 1835. Erroneous data has been furnished to LDS and all
over the internet. It's a familiar story.
Hugh
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:05:06 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]>
wrote:
<snip>
Bob,
Your suggestion certainly put me on the right track. I wasn't able to
find the right Registry entry doing a search for GEDX on the old
computer, but I did a search for the validations code, and found the
proper items to edit. After installing GEDX on the new computer, I
then simply found the same entry in REGEDIT on the new computer, and
entered the appropriate codes, and all works fine!
FWIW for anyone else attempting same, do a search for "Bonham" and
then make the entries for the valid codes under
Users\User\Registration. I entered everything that was there on the
old computer: AuthCode, AuthCode2, EmailAddress, FirstName, LastName,
OrderNo, and rememberPW just in case all were needed. But as Bob
cautioned, be careful if you don't have experience making Registry
changes, or you can totally screw up your system.
wrote:
<snip>
If that program is sitting in the folder C::\Program Files\Gedx? you might
try just overwriting the files there in the new computer with the ones from
the old which would be validated if it's a file mod. It might also be
someething that is put in the Windows Registry. Click Start-Run, enter
Regedit, then OK. Look but don't make any changes unless you know what you
are doing and have backed it up. Just do a Search for GedX and look for
possibilities.
Bob
Bob,
Your suggestion certainly put me on the right track. I wasn't able to
find the right Registry entry doing a search for GEDX on the old
computer, but I did a search for the validations code, and found the
proper items to edit. After installing GEDX on the new computer, I
then simply found the same entry in REGEDIT on the new computer, and
entered the appropriate codes, and all works fine!
FWIW for anyone else attempting same, do a search for "Bonham" and
then make the entries for the valid codes under
Users\User\Registration. I entered everything that was there on the
old computer: AuthCode, AuthCode2, EmailAddress, FirstName, LastName,
OrderNo, and rememberPW just in case all were needed. But as Bob
cautioned, be careful if you don't have experience making Registry
changes, or you can totally screw up your system.
-
Robert Heiling
Re: Problem
Charlie wrote:
Terrific!!! Glad to hear that it worked, Charlie, and thanks for letting us
know.
Bob
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:05:06 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]
wrote:
snip
Bob,
Your suggestion certainly put me on the right track. I wasn't able to
find the right Registry entry doing a search for GEDX on the old
computer, but I did a search for the validations code, and found the
proper items to edit. After installing GEDX on the new computer, I
then simply found the same entry in REGEDIT on the new computer, and
entered the appropriate codes, and all works fine!
Terrific!!! Glad to hear that it worked, Charlie, and thanks for letting us
know.
Bob
-
Sherry
Re: Problem
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
<snip>
Problem is, all the previous registry entries were wiped with the new
install. Would the "Bonham" entry be there when GedX is installed?
Never edited the registry before without extensive hand-holding. Maybe
I'll give it a try next week when I get back from my trip - and *after*
making a backup of the registry!
I would so love to be able to use the program fully again!
Sherry
news:[email protected]:
<snip>
Bob,
Your suggestion certainly put me on the right track. I wasn't able
to find the right Registry entry doing a search for GEDX on the old
computer, but I did a search for the validations code, and found the
proper items to edit. After installing GEDX on the new computer, I
then simply found the same entry in REGEDIT on the new computer, and
entered the appropriate codes, and all works fine!
FWIW for anyone else attempting same, do a search for "Bonham" and
then make the entries for the valid codes under
Users\User\Registration. I entered everything that was there on the
old computer: AuthCode, AuthCode2, EmailAddress, FirstName,
LastName, OrderNo, and rememberPW just in case all were needed. But
as Bob cautioned, be careful if you don't have experience making
Registry changes, or you can totally screw up your system.
Problem is, all the previous registry entries were wiped with the new
install. Would the "Bonham" entry be there when GedX is installed?
Never edited the registry before without extensive hand-holding. Maybe
I'll give it a try next week when I get back from my trip - and *after*
making a backup of the registry!
I would so love to be able to use the program fully again!
Sherry
-
Charlie
Re: Problem
On 21 Oct 2004 14:15:12 GMT, Sherry <[email protected]> wrote:
Sherry,
If you actually registered through Bonham's web site before the
upgrade, and still have the message he sent back with the validation
codes, then I can probably walk you through the Registry setup. Just
contact me by email when you want to have a go at it. I suggest using
my Yahoo address for the initial contact.... charliehoffp at Yahoo dot
com, but entered in the usual way with an @ sign and a ".".
Charlie <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
snip
Bob,
Your suggestion certainly put me on the right track. I wasn't able
to find the right Registry entry doing a search for GEDX on the old
computer, but I did a search for the validations code, and found the
proper items to edit. After installing GEDX on the new computer, I
then simply found the same entry in REGEDIT on the new computer, and
entered the appropriate codes, and all works fine!
FWIW for anyone else attempting same, do a search for "Bonham" and
then make the entries for the valid codes under
Users\User\Registration. I entered everything that was there on the
old computer: AuthCode, AuthCode2, EmailAddress, FirstName,
LastName, OrderNo, and rememberPW just in case all were needed. But
as Bob cautioned, be careful if you don't have experience making
Registry changes, or you can totally screw up your system.
Problem is, all the previous registry entries were wiped with the new
install. Would the "Bonham" entry be there when GedX is installed?
Never edited the registry before without extensive hand-holding. Maybe
I'll give it a try next week when I get back from my trip - and *after*
making a backup of the registry!
I would so love to be able to use the program fully again!
Sherry
Sherry,
If you actually registered through Bonham's web site before the
upgrade, and still have the message he sent back with the validation
codes, then I can probably walk you through the Registry setup. Just
contact me by email when you want to have a go at it. I suggest using
my Yahoo address for the initial contact.... charliehoffp at Yahoo dot
com, but entered in the usual way with an @ sign and a ".".
-
J. Hugh Sullivan
Re: Problem
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:08:02 -0400, singhals <[email protected]>
wrote:
I'm pursuing the thought...
Over the years I put almost everything in [events] and decided that I
would return later to solve the grammar and sentence structure
problems.
The opposite end of that philosophy is that only birth, marriage,
death and burial are events and everything else is a note. In that
case the solution appears to be to write a "biography" of the
individual. In such a case sentence structure and grammar would be
precisely as one wished without editing.
Another benefit of that method is that one could use several genie
programs and not worry about whether gedcoms tansferred properly.
You may have put the lie to an aged bow-wow being unable to comprehend
new wiles.
Hugh
wrote:
J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
Your thought of having as few fields as possible is interesting... But
doesn't that almost eliminate using sources? Or do you show sources in
the Notes, too?
Hugh
Yeah; any sourcing I feel necessary to include is in the NOTES. And
after my publishing fantasmagoria, I've even started making sure the
whole thing flows in a reasonable narrative format. (g) As I mentioned
a bit back, I've found that during disaster recovery TEXT is more often
recoverable in a usable format that databases etc. PRINT TO FILE is one
EXCELLENT invention. (g)
Cheryl
I'm pursuing the thought...
Over the years I put almost everything in [events] and decided that I
would return later to solve the grammar and sentence structure
problems.
The opposite end of that philosophy is that only birth, marriage,
death and burial are events and everything else is a note. In that
case the solution appears to be to write a "biography" of the
individual. In such a case sentence structure and grammar would be
precisely as one wished without editing.
Another benefit of that method is that one could use several genie
programs and not worry about whether gedcoms tansferred properly.
You may have put the lie to an aged bow-wow being unable to comprehend
new wiles.
Hugh