Genbox - your views?

[Shelley Crawford]

Hello,

I'm currently using TMG, which I chose because I loved the witness feature.
However, I'm getting tired of some of the little frustrations and glitches
that seem to come with the program...

I've been trying out other programs (only those with a similar witness
feature) and am starting to thing that Genbox may be the way to go. I'd like
to get views from anyone who uses it (or not) on it's pros and cons,
especially as compared to TMG.

Thanks
Shelley

[Jim Winfrey]

"Shelley Crawford" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

Hello,

I'm currently using TMG, which I chose because I loved the witness feature.
However, I'm getting tired of some of the little frustrations and glitches
that seem to come with the program...

I've been trying out other programs (only those with a similar witness
feature) and am starting to thing that Genbox may be the way to go. I'd like
to get views from anyone who uses it (or not) on it's pros and cons,
especially as compared to TMG.

Thanks
Shelley

Shelley,

Why don't you sign up for the Genbox mail list at
genbox-l-rootsweb.com There are a number of TMG refugees on that list
and you can get most questions answered.

In my opinion, Genbox does not handle Witnessed events quite as well
as TMG in that GB does not show anything but the location on the
summary page of people linked to the event. Also, in my opinion, GB
is a superior program in most ways.

Another program that handles Witnesses pretty well is Heredis. There
is a free version which is pretty much full featured. Heredis is a
decent program if you can get used to some things being handled in the
French traditional method - check out Descendant reports for example.

Jim

[julia]

Definitely the way to go... I had tried many if not all the genealogy
programs available, but had never felt truly comfortable with any of
them. Although several of them were ok in one or two areas, I soon
found limitations with them. I discovered Genbox around a year ago,
and have not moved since.

The main advantages for me are its flexibility, the handling of
multiple place names, the options for charts and reports, and most of
all the attitude of the developer. The program has improved beyond
belief within this last year, and although there are still some small
areas that could be tweaked, I genuinely feel that is is the best out
there.

Julia

[Paul Blair]

julia wrote:

Definitely the way to go... I had tried many if not all the genealogy
programs available, but had never felt truly comfortable with any of
them. Although several of them were ok in one or two areas, I soon
found limitations with them. I discovered Genbox around a year ago,
and have not moved since.

The main advantages for me are its flexibility, the handling of
multiple place names, the options for charts and reports, and most of
all the attitude of the developer. The program has improved beyond
belief within this last year, and although there are still some small
areas that could be tweaked, I genuinely feel that is is the best out
there.

Julia

And (like Legacy) it is Microsoft Access...so this means you can roll
your own reports! (the weakest aspect of genie programs...)

Paul Blair
Australia

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On 10 Oct 2004 03:04:21 -0700, [email protected] (julia)
wrote:

Definitely the way to go... I had tried many if not all the genealogy
programs available, but had never felt truly comfortable with any of
them. Although several of them were ok in one or two areas, I soon
found limitations with them. I discovered Genbox around a year ago,
and have not moved since.

The main advantages for me are its flexibility, the handling of
multiple place names, the options for charts and reports, and most of
all the attitude of the developer. The program has improved beyond
belief within this last year, and although there are still some small
areas that could be tweaked, I genuinely feel that is is the best out
there.

Julia

I downloaded Genbox two days ago and worked with it a bit. Not for
argument but for discussion...

I found the loading to print reports very slow compared to RM and
Legacy. Since I only use FGSs and Descendant Narrative reports I found
the others superfluous. The same report on Genbox was over 500 pages,
400+ on Legacy and almost 400 on RM. "Ibid" was the favorite repeated
source on Genbox - line after line after line.

I haven't tried data entry (exept GED) but it doesn't look simple and
navigation is not too user friendly. Of course I understand that
familiarity with a program simplifies use. I've got 29 more days...

Now I'll look at Heredis.

Hugh

[Ole Bjørn Darrud]

"J. Hugh Sullivan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

On 10 Oct 2004 03:04:21 -0700, [email protected] (julia)
.................
I haven't tried data entry (exept GED) but it doesn't look simple and
navigation is not too user friendly. Of course I understand that
familiarity with a program simplifies use. I've got 29 more days...

Now I'll look at Heredis.
............

I've seen Heredis mentioned here a couple of times.
Be careful with import/export of gedcom. It seems that Heredis does not
follow gedcom 5.5 basic rules.
Source detail/citation recorded as PAGE is not imported into Heredis
Alternate names are excluded from import as well (extra NAME tag).
Heredis is exporting source details as NOTE tags.
I have asked Heredis devolpers to explain these discrepansies for 3 months
now, without getting response.
My advice is to stay away from Heredis until import/export capabilities are
OK.
Regards
Ole Bjørn

[Robert Heiling]

"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote:

On 10 Oct 2004 03:04:21 -0700, [email protected] (julia)
wrote:

Definitely the way to go... I had tried many if not all the genealogy
programs available, but had never felt truly comfortable with any of
them. Although several of them were ok in one or two areas, I soon
found limitations with them. I discovered Genbox around a year ago,
and have not moved since.

The main advantages for me are its flexibility, the handling of
multiple place names, the options for charts and reports, and most of
all the attitude of the developer. The program has improved beyond
belief within this last year, and although there are still some small
areas that could be tweaked, I genuinely feel that is is the best out
there.

Julia

I downloaded Genbox two days ago and worked with it a bit. Not for
argument but for discussion...

I found the loading to print reports very slow compared to RM and
Legacy. Since I only use FGSs and Descendant Narrative reports I found
the others superfluous. The same report on Genbox was over 500 pages,
400+ on Legacy and almost 400 on RM. "Ibid" was the favorite repeated
source on Genbox - line after line after line.

I haven't tried data entry (exept GED) but it doesn't look simple and
navigation is not too user friendly. Of course I understand that
familiarity with a program simplifies use. I've got 29 more days...

Now I'll look at Heredis.

Hugh

Did you happen to figure out how to have the list of individuals be
presented as surname, given-name as opposed to the default given-name
surname? I find that very hard to read.

Bob

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:23:55 +0200, "Ole Bjørn Darrud"
<[email protected]> wrote:

"J. Hugh Sullivan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 10 Oct 2004 03:04:21 -0700, [email protected] (julia)
................
I haven't tried data entry (exept GED) but it doesn't look simple and
navigation is not too user friendly. Of course I understand that
familiarity with a program simplifies use. I've got 29 more days...

Now I'll look at Heredis.
...........
I've seen Heredis mentioned here a couple of times.
Be careful with import/export of gedcom. It seems that Heredis does not
follow gedcom 5.5 basic rules.
Source detail/citation recorded as PAGE is not imported into Heredis
Alternate names are excluded from import as well (extra NAME tag).
Heredis is exporting source details as NOTE tags.
I have asked Heredis devolpers to explain these discrepansies for 3 months
now, without getting response.
My advice is to stay away from Heredis until import/export capabilities are
OK.
Regards
Ole Bjørn


Thanks for the advice. I use one main program and save all gedcoms

from it. I usually have several other programs on the machine to ply
with and import from one source - but I don't deport (export) from
them.

Hugh

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:50:37 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]>
wrote:

"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote:

On 10 Oct 2004 03:04:21 -0700, [email protected] (julia)
wrote:

Definitely the way to go... I had tried many if not all the genealogy
programs available, but had never felt truly comfortable with any of
them. Although several of them were ok in one or two areas, I soon
found limitations with them. I discovered Genbox around a year ago,
and have not moved since.

The main advantages for me are its flexibility, the handling of
multiple place names, the options for charts and reports, and most of
all the attitude of the developer. The program has improved beyond
belief within this last year, and although there are still some small
areas that could be tweaked, I genuinely feel that is is the best out
there.

Julia

I downloaded Genbox two days ago and worked with it a bit. Not for
argument but for discussion...

I found the loading to print reports very slow compared to RM and
Legacy. Since I only use FGSs and Descendant Narrative reports I found
the others superfluous. The same report on Genbox was over 500 pages,
400+ on Legacy and almost 400 on RM. "Ibid" was the favorite repeated
source on Genbox - line after line after line.

I haven't tried data entry (exept GED) but it doesn't look simple and
navigation is not too user friendly. Of course I understand that
familiarity with a program simplifies use. I've got 29 more days...

Now I'll look at Heredis.

Hugh

Did you happen to figure out how to have the list of individuals be
presented as surname, given-name as opposed to the default given-name
surname? I find that very hard to read.

Bob

I haven't gone that far yet, Bob. I'm already disturbed because it

defaults to first name on the display since I am...

J. Hugh

[maud]

Did you happen to figure out how to have the list of individuals be
presented as surname, given-name as opposed to the default given-name
surname? I find that very hard to read.

Bob

On the List View names are presented as surname, given-name, while on
the reports they are indeed shown with the given name first.
Personally I find this easier to read, but I understand others may not
agree. However I would be extremely confident that Bill would be
willing to include the option for other display options if asked. And
that it would happen fairly soon. For me that is another of the
advantages of Genbox...

I haven't gone that far yet, Bob. I'm already disturbed because it
defaults to first name on the display since I am...

J. Hugh

Hugh - Just out of interest I tried entering you into my database, as
name variations are supposed to be another strong point of Genbox, and
I don't already have a name similar to yours. No matter how I entered
you I still ended up with a surname of Sullivan, given names J Hugh..
Or am I missing something?

Julia

[Shelley Crawford]

Thanks to all for your useful comments.

I'm still liking Genbox, but in the interest of being thorough would also
like to have a look at Heredis. Unfortunately when I submit my email address
etc while trying to download the program I just get an error page. I've sent
them a message about this, but as yet had no reply (hmmm support not so
good...?). I can get the download link from the German page, but that
doesn't help me much.

I wondered if someone who has it could send me the link to the (English)
download page?

Shelley
Australia

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On 12 Oct 2004 00:33:52 -0700, [email protected] (maud) wrote:

Did you happen to figure out how to have the list of individuals be
presented as surname, given-name as opposed to the default given-name
surname? I find that very hard to read.

Bob

On the List View names are presented as surname, given-name, while on
the reports they are indeed shown with the given name first.
Personally I find this easier to read, but I understand others may not
agree. However I would be extremely confident that Bill would be
willing to include the option for other display options if asked. And
that it would happen fairly soon. For me that is another of the
advantages of Genbox...



I haven't gone that far yet, Bob. I'm already disturbed because it
defaults to first name on the display since I am...

J. Hugh

Hugh - Just out of interest I tried entering you into my database, as
name variations are supposed to be another strong point of Genbox, and
I don't already have a name similar to yours. No matter how I entered
you I still ended up with a surname of Sullivan, given names J Hugh..
Or am I missing something?

Julia

The Pedigree screen lists as James "Hugh" Sullivan which is the way it
is entered in the GEDCOM.

But the Summary screen lists me as James Sullivan and that is
intolerable. It also lists my father as James Sullivan and he was also
called by his middle name. FTM does the same thing.

Of course I could counteract that by making my birth name J. Hugh, or
just Hugh Sullivan - or I could legally have my first and middle names
reversed but I won't give in.

I have made an issue out of entities insisting on first name. I refuse
to answer to it and when they ask for first name only I show "J.
Hugh". I endorse checks made to James or James H. as "by J. Hugh
Sullivan".

Everyone should be encouraged to call their children by the first name
- calling by a nickname does not moot the issue.

Hugh

[Shelley Crawford]

The Pedigree screen lists as James "Hugh" Sullivan which is the way it
is entered in the GEDCOM.

But the Summary screen lists me as James Sullivan and that is
intolerable. It also lists my father as James Sullivan and he was also
called by his middle name. FTM does the same thing.

Of course I could counteract that by making my birth name J. Hugh, or
just Hugh Sullivan - or I could legally have my first and middle names
reversed but I won't give in.

I have made an issue out of entities insisting on first name. I refuse
to answer to it and when they ask for first name only I show "J.
Hugh". I endorse checks made to James or James H. as "by J. Hugh
Sullivan".

Everyone should be encouraged to call their children by the first name
- calling by a nickname does not moot the issue.

Hugh

My mother had the same issue with her name. She was given her first name
only because an aunt insisted, but since birth was always called by her
second name.

I've just been playing with the identifiers page, and I think Genbox can
handle it. You can choose a name other than the "birth name" to be the
primary name and/or the preferred name. It seems to feed through to the
display and lists depending on what you choose. Presumably the help files
clarify how each option works.

Shelley

[singhals]

maud wrote:

Did you happen to figure out how to have the list of individuals be
presented as surname, given-name as opposed to the default given-name
surname? I find that very hard to read.

Bob


On the List View names are presented as surname, given-name, while on
the reports they are indeed shown with the given name first.
Personally I find this easier to read, but I understand others may not
agree. However I would be extremely confident that Bill would be
willing to include the option for other display options if asked. And
that it would happen fairly soon. For me that is another of the
advantages of Genbox...




I haven't gone that far yet, Bob. I'm already disturbed because it
defaults to first name on the display since I am...

J. Hugh


Hugh - Just out of interest I tried entering you into my database, as
name variations are supposed to be another strong point of Genbox, and
I don't already have a name similar to yours. No matter how I entered
you I still ended up with a surname of Sullivan, given names J Hugh..
Or am I missing something?

Julia

Yeah, you are. He isn't called "J.", he's called Hugh. And so far as I
can tell, not even RM will fix that for him. (g)

Seriously, if you've got a family full of folks who use their middle
names, current software gives you heartburn because there's little way
to indicate that J. is known as Hugh and make that choice STICK in all
situations.

Ever hear of that famous author, Francis Fitzgerald?

Cheryl

[singhals]

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

Of course I could counteract that by making my birth name J. Hugh, or
just Hugh Sullivan - or I could legally have my first and middle names
reversed but I won't give in.

I have made an issue out of entities insisting on first name. I refuse
to answer to it and when they ask for first name only I show "J.
Hugh". I endorse checks made to James or James H. as "by J. Hugh
Sullivan".

Don't fly much, do you? (g)

Cheryl

[Robert Heiling]

maud wrote:

Did you happen to figure out how to have the list of individuals be
presented as surname, given-name as opposed to the default given-name
surname? I find that very hard to read.

Bob

On the List View names are presented as surname, given-name, while on
the reports they are indeed shown with the given name first.
Personally I find this easier to read, but I understand others may not
agree. However I would be extremely confident that Bill would be
willing to include the option for other display options if asked. And
that it would happen fairly soon. For me that is another of the
advantages of Genbox...

With the word "list"in mind, I was able to find it somewhat hidden at
View-Lists-Records-Individuals and that indeed has the surname, given-name
format that I prefer for such lists. I had been clicking View-Individuals
and then the down-arrow in the very top name window which brings up a
"Select Individuals for View" and that has the wrong format for a list
IMHO. Elsewhere the given-name surname format is fine and preferred.

Bob

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:03:05 +1000, "Shelley Crawford"
<[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks to all for your useful comments.

I'm still liking Genbox, but in the interest of being thorough would also
like to have a look at Heredis. Unfortunately when I submit my email address
etc while trying to download the program I just get an error page. I've sent
them a message about this, but as yet had no reply (hmmm support not so
good...?). I can get the download link from the German page, but that
doesn't help me much.

I wondered if someone who has it could send me the link to the (English)
download page?

Shelley
Australia

A Heredis search will take you to a page which will theoretically
enable one to download the English version. However, like you, I got
the error message, sent them an e-mail and have not heard. C'est la
vie!

Hugh

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:08:48 -0400, singhals <[email protected]>
wrote:

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:


Of course I could counteract that by making my birth name J. Hugh, or
just Hugh Sullivan - or I could legally have my first and middle names
reversed but I won't give in.

I have made an issue out of entities insisting on first name. I refuse
to answer to it and when they ask for first name only I show "J.
Hugh". I endorse checks made to James or James H. as "by J. Hugh
Sullivan".

Don't fly much, do you? (g)

Cheryl

I don't fly much lalely - but I'll admit it's tough to drive to HI.

Our KY drivers license insists on first name. I wrote the governor and
received a reply from the Sec. of Transportation. They could not
program the procedure to do otherwise. I suggested they not hire
idiots next time.

I was stopped by the MS HP and he asked if I was James Sullivan and I
told him I was not. That led to a lot of give and take! KY used to
show the SS# on the license and I blocked it out - they didn't like
that either.

My face is seriously spited from me cutting off my nose so often to...

My Navy Retirement ID card is listed "James H." but they call me
Commander, sir! And they send the checks to J. Hugh at the bank.

Even when IDs are made out "James H." I sign "J. Hugh".

[Dave Hinz]

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:06:20 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:

Seriously, if you've got a family full of folks who use their middle
names, current software gives you heartburn because there's little way
to indicate that J. is known as Hugh and make that choice STICK in all
situations.

Sounds like a "You can spell it J. if you want, but it's pronounced Hugh"
situation.

Dave Hinz

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On 12 Oct 2004 16:30:43 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:06:20 -0400, singhals <[email protected]> wrote:

Seriously, if you've got a family full of folks who use their middle
names, current software gives you heartburn because there's little way
to indicate that J. is known as Hugh and make that choice STICK in all
situations.

Sounds like a "You can spell it J. if you want, but it's pronounced Hugh"
situation.

Dave Hinz

I wish I had thought of that!

Hugh

[Dave Hinz]

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 18:53:34 GMT, J. Hugh Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote:

On 12 Oct 2004 16:30:43 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

Sounds like a "You can spell it J. if you want, but it's pronounced Hugh"
situation.

I wish I had thought of that!

Feel free to use it, and pretend you did, if you'd like.

Dave "it's pronounced 'Dave'" Hinz

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On 12 Oct 2004 19:00:28 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 18:53:34 GMT, J. Hugh Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote:
On 12 Oct 2004 16:30:43 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

Sounds like a "You can spell it J. if you want, but it's pronounced Hugh"
situation.

I wish I had thought of that!

Feel free to use it, and pretend you did, if you'd like.

Dave "it's pronounced 'Dave'" Hinz

Thanks - but I was going to anyhow!

Hugh

[Paul Blair]

Robert Heiling wrote:

maud wrote:


Did you happen to figure out how to have the list of individuals be
presented as surname, given-name as opposed to the default given-name
surname? I find that very hard to read.

Bob

On the List View names are presented as surname, given-name, while on
the reports they are indeed shown with the given name first.
Personally I find this easier to read, but I understand others may not
agree. However I would be extremely confident that Bill would be
willing to include the option for other display options if asked. And
that it would happen fairly soon. For me that is another of the
advantages of Genbox...


With the word "list"in mind, I was able to find it somewhat hidden at
View-Lists-Records-Individuals and that indeed has the surname, given-name
format that I prefer for such lists. I had been clicking View-Individuals
and then the down-arrow in the very top name window which brings up a
"Select Individuals for View" and that has the wrong format for a list
IMHO. Elsewhere the given-name surname format is fine and preferred.

Bob

OK, maybe J Hugh could tell us whether some of the methods offered by

software meet his needs...

FTM uses AKA (also known as, very CSI!)
GenBox uses Nicknames
Legacy uses Alternate Names

They seem to work for me where folk are known by something other than
the very first given name entered. As my wife is one of those, I have to
get it right!

On another topic, try to have GenBox calculate the longest marriages in
your database. I do it from Access, but maybe there is a way from the
application without having to go to the source data. I've also been
trying to do it in TMG, but failed there.

Paul Blair
Australia

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:04:55 GMT, Paul Blair <[email protected]>
wrote:

OK, maybe J Hugh could tell us whether some of the methods offered by
software meet his needs...

I don't like to be too specific because I think it's commercial. But I
will for once.

At the moment Heredis is the only program I know of that I have not
tried - and that's because it can't be downloaded at their site.

Let me set some parameters first. A brief trial is not sufficient to
really test a program - one needs to use it long enough to "get used
to it". I only try one that long if it immediately appeals to me. And
I look for certain functions which appeal to me but perhaps not
everyone.

That said, for my purposes Legacy and RootsMagic are clearly the
superior genealogy programs. I use both because each has one or more
functions which I like better than the other. I only create gedcoms
from the one I consider to be my favorite. Using both indiscriminately
would lead to problems methinks.

I look for ease of navigation and insertion of data which should be a
requirement of everyone. And I look for flexibility of reports so that
I can print exactly what I wish exactly the way I wish. I notice the
speed of accumulating report data for printing. I notice when a report
uses too much "white space" and takes 500 pages to print vice 350
pages. I notice which report needs the least editing to appear as I
wish. I look for company reps who are not invisible. And I don't care
for cluttered screens - they overwhelm most people. If it took several
programs to accomplish those requirements I would purchase and update
several programs.

Although the cost of the programs is not a bother to me I think they
should have a free trial period limited in some fashion - and I don't
mean a demo, I mean one that can actually be used either for a limited
period or with limited printer output - or both.

Finally, Hugh is just plain comfortable with the two programs I
mentioned but that is an individual matter. That I prefer large cars
doesn't impact the market for small cars. Most of the people here that
I consider expert use a different program(s) and their voice is at
least as strong as mine.

If anything comes out of this, it should be for every person to try
several programs and make up his own mind which he prefers. If he
doesn't, or if he places his total faith in what someone else
recommends, I think he is doing himself an injustice.

If I run into a problem with a program I don't hesitate to ask for
help - as I just have on the problem report. I have no problem being
dumb, I just have a problem staying that way.

FTM uses AKA (also known as, very CSI!)
GenBox uses Nicknames
Legacy uses Alternate Names

They seem to work for me where folk are known by something other than
the very first given name entered. As my wife is one of those, I have to
get it right!

I think a program should allow for an entry something like this: James
"Hugh" Sullivan. And then ask whether the first name or name in quotes
(or other symbol) should be use for reports, screen, alpha listing,
etc. Default could be first name or full name.

On another topic, try to have GenBox calculate the longest marriages in
your database. I do it from Access, but maybe there is a way from the
application without having to go to the source data. I've also been
trying to do it in TMG, but failed there.

I recommend that a program moderate User Groups. Of course this news
group serves a purpose but a program user group is limited to the
program, the people are friendly and several are expert.

As for longest marriage I plan to have that record in my data base -
56 years, 4 months, 2 days, 11 hours, 441/2 minutes so far (as I type
this).

But I don't see what you are trying to do as an essential requirement
for most people - and companies look to the bottom line. I think most
people prefer usefulness to bells and whistles. Okay, maybe Rudolph
would not be Rudolph without the red nose...

When evaluating my opinion please take into consideration what you
paid for it.

Hugh

[Paul Blair]

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:04:55 GMT, Paul Blair <[email protected]
wrote:


OK, maybe J Hugh could tell us whether some of the methods offered by
software meet his needs...


I don't like to be too specific because I think it's commercial. But I
will for once.


snipped - a whole lot of sensible comment

If I run into a problem with a program I don't hesitate to ask for
help - as I just have on the problem report. I have no problem being
dumb, I just have a problem staying that way.


FTM uses AKA (also known as, very CSI!)
GenBox uses Nicknames
Legacy uses Alternate Names

They seem to work for me where folk are known by something other than
the very first given name entered. As my wife is one of those, I have to
get it right!


I think a program should allow for an entry something like this: James
"Hugh" Sullivan. And then ask whether the first name or name in quotes
(or other symbol) should be use for reports, screen, alpha listing,
etc. Default could be first name or full name.

I enter the true given name in full, just as everyone should. That was
what the parents decided. But if the subject is known as part of that
name, or a nickname, then that adds to (not transcends) the parental
choice. I wish for a simple underline for the first case, AKA for the
second.

On another topic, try to have GenBox calculate the longest marriages in
your database. I do it from Access, but maybe there is a way from the
application without having to go to the source data. I've also been
trying to do it in TMG, but failed there.


I recommend that a program moderate User Groups. Of course this news
group serves a purpose but a program user group is limited to the
program, the people are friendly and several are expert.

As for longest marriage I plan to have that record in my data base -
56 years, 4 months, 2 days, 11 hours, 441/2 minutes so far (as I type
this).

Congratulations. But we have a couple of couples over 70, and decided
that we would mark the longest ..um... participation in an appropriate
way - just as there is a steady stream of enquiries for the most used
given names, biggest families (16 is the current record), and all those
who made 90 plus. Making good reports is not a strong feature in genie
software, which is why I like to be able to connect directly to the data
if all else fails.

But I don't see what you are trying to do as an essential requirement
for most people - and companies look to the bottom line. I think most
people prefer usefulness to bells and whistles. Okay, maybe Rudolph
would not be Rudolph without the red nose...

When evaluating my opinion please take into consideration what you
paid for it.

Hugh

We pay a lot more than you, given the exchange rate and the taxes
imposed on the mail and duty. So we sure are careful!

Paul Blair
Australia

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 21:20:34 GMT, Paul Blair <[email protected]>
wrote:

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

snipped - a whole lot of sensible comment

Me, too.

I think a program should allow for an entry something like this: James
"Hugh" Sullivan. And then ask whether the first name or name in quotes
(or other symbol) should be use for reports, screen, alpha listing,
etc. Default could be first name or full name.

I enter the true given name in full, just as everyone should. That was
what the parents decided. But if the subject is known as part of that
name, or a nickname, then that adds to (not transcends) the parental
choice. I wish for a simple underline for the first case, AKA for the
second.

I'm trying to overcome two problems. So many people, especially in the
south, are known by their middle name. When I record and use the full
name and people ask for them by their "called" name I can't find them
on the report index. When I only have the "called name" which is not
the first name I can't find them on the census. Or it takes a lot of
effort in each case. I have always enjoyed having info instantaneously
at my fingertips.

On another topic, try to have GenBox calculate the longest marriages in
your database. I do it from Access, but maybe there is a way from the
application without having to go to the source data. I've also been
trying to do it in TMG, but failed there.


I recommend that a program moderate User Groups. Of course this news
group serves a purpose but a program user group is limited to the
program, the people are friendly and several are expert.

As for longest marriage I plan to have that record in my data base -
56 years, 4 months, 2 days, 11 hours, 441/2 minutes so far (as I type
this).

Congratulations. But we have a couple of couples over 70, and decided
that we would mark the longest ..um... participation in an appropriate
way - just as there is a steady stream of enquiries for the most used
given names, biggest families (16 is the current record), and all those
who made 90 plus. Making good reports is not a strong feature in genie
software, which is why I like to be able to connect directly to the data
if all else fails.

I understand and compliment you but for marketing purposes the
function is not essential. If computers had been around when I was
young I would have been an excllent programmer as a hobby.

We pay a lot more than you, given the exchange rate and the taxes
imposed on the mail and duty. So we sure are careful!

You have brown snakes, too. But either Australia or China will take
over when we decline and fall - get ready, Paul!

Hugh

[Paul Blair]

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 21:20:34 GMT, Paul Blair <[email protected]
wrote:


J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:


snipped - a whole lot of sensible comment


Me, too.


I think a program should allow for an entry something like this: James
"Hugh" Sullivan. And then ask whether the first name or name in quotes
(or other symbol) should be use for reports, screen, alpha listing,
etc. Default could be first name or full name.

I enter the true given name in full, just as everyone should. That was
what the parents decided. But if the subject is known as part of that
name, or a nickname, then that adds to (not transcends) the parental
choice. I wish for a simple underline for the first case, AKA for the
second.


I'm trying to overcome two problems. So many people, especially in the
south, are known by their middle name. When I record and use the full
name and people ask for them by their "called" name I can't find them
on the report index. When I only have the "called name" which is not
the first name I can't find them on the census. Or it takes a lot of
effort in each case. I have always enjoyed having info instantaneously
at my fingertips.



On another topic, try to have GenBox calculate the longest marriages in
your database. I do it from Access, but maybe there is a way from the
application without having to go to the source data. I've also been
trying to do it in TMG, but failed there.


I recommend that a program moderate User Groups. Of course this news
group serves a purpose but a program user group is limited to the
program, the people are friendly and several are expert.

As for longest marriage I plan to have that record in my data base -
56 years, 4 months, 2 days, 11 hours, 441/2 minutes so far (as I type
this).

Congratulations. But we have a couple of couples over 70, and decided
that we would mark the longest ..um... participation in an appropriate
way - just as there is a steady stream of enquiries for the most used
given names, biggest families (16 is the current record), and all those
who made 90 plus. Making good reports is not a strong feature in genie
software, which is why I like to be able to connect directly to the data
if all else fails.


I understand and compliment you but for marketing purposes the
function is not essential. If computers had been around when I was
young I would have been an excllent programmer as a hobby.

Not the function, perhaps, but the functionality *is* essential. In
common old data terms, there's nothing special about a genie program
with respect to storage methods. But getting the data back how you like
it...aha! And the companies are totally deaf - no one in Oz likes
writing dates as 07 Feb, but TMG only gives you the leading zero option.
I resist the temptation to roll my own, but I run FTM, Legacy and GenBox
just to get some useful reports!

You have brown snakes, too. But either Australia or China will take
over when we decline and fall - get ready, Paul!

We hope to send you some under the Free Trade Agreement...

Hugh

Paul

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 01:09:00 GMT, Paul Blair <[email protected]>
wrote:

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

I understand and compliment you but for marketing purposes the
function is not essential. If computers had been around when I was
young I would have been an excllent programmer as a hobby.

Not the function, perhaps, but the functionality *is* essential. In
common old data terms, there's nothing special about a genie program
with respect to storage methods. But getting the data back how you like
it...aha! And the companies are totally deaf - no one in Oz likes
writing dates as 07 Feb, but TMG only gives you the leading zero option.
I resist the temptation to roll my own, but I run FTM, Legacy and GenBox
just to get some useful reports!

I have found the people at RootsMagic, Legacy and TMG to be VERY
available, receptive and helpful. But I try to ask questions other
than "Why did my computer crash?".

I like the "07 Feb" date style and have used it since I was in the
Navy - and not just in the monthly newsletter I write for the retired
officers in this area.

You have brown snakes, too. But either Australia or China will take
over when we decline and fall - get ready, Paul!

We hope to send you some under the Free Trade Agreement...

Very generous of you but please include us out!

I've talked with a number of your countrymen on amateur radio and I
can understand Australian but I can't speak it.

Hugh

[Paul Blair]

I've talked with a number of your countrymen on amateur radio and I
can understand Australian but I can't speak it.

Hugh

Neither can we.

Your e-mail address rejects my blandishments...

Paul Blair

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:26:46 GMT, Paul Blair <[email protected]>
wrote:

I've talked with a number of your countrymen on amateur radio and I
can understand Australian but I can't speak it.

Hugh

Neither can we.

Your e-mail address rejects my blandishments...

Paul Blair

I do that to discourage spam - try [email protected] if you wish.

Hugh

[Robert Heiling]

Shelley Crawford wrote:

Hello,

I'm currently using TMG, which I chose because I loved the witness feature.
However, I'm getting tired of some of the little frustrations and glitches
that seem to come with the program...

I've been trying out other programs (only those with a similar witness
feature) and am starting to thing that Genbox may be the way to go. I'd like
to get views from anyone who uses it (or not) on it's pros and cons,
especially as compared to TMG.

Thanks
Shelley

As an unhappy TMG user, I too have been test driving GENBOX as I continue my
search for some desired features.

I do like the presentation it has for a person of ALL tags (not just BMD or not
just children) in chronological order like TMG & LEGACY as it gives a complete
picture of an individual. Only programs that have that view available are being
considered.

Genbox also has relative addressing for multimedia files. That is a feature
that TMG is lacking and is desired enough that I started a thread on the topic
a few months ago. Perhaps Genbox didn't have the feature back then, but nobody
mentioned Genbox at that time. Lack of this feature is one reason for wanting to
leave TMG. Relative addressing lets one move the whole database without having
to change imbedded file paths.

Another feature that TMG doesn't have is handling of GIF image files. These are
important to me as I have census Sources in the form of .gif images. GENBOX
makes it look as though it handles them in its help section when it says:
"Format
The Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"".
When I saw that, I thought I had found the program I needed. However, when put
to the test, it does Not handle .gif images. Jpg & tif are no problem, but not
gif. I feel lied to and am not happy about that.

TMG butchered the creation of the gedcom file and that has made me even more
concerned about ever getting my data out of TMG intact. The word AGE in some
notes causes the gedcom to have a "1 AGE" followed by "2 CONT" tags when that
AGE was part of the Notes only. I see that they still haven't fixed that!

Then the RESI tags are lacking their data! There is another problem, but it
appears to be an error on the part of GENBOX. One set of notes is formatted
line by line with desired carriage return-line feeds. Those lines are in the
Gedcom in separate CONT lines, but GENBOX runs them all together without the
CR-LF's.

Bob

[Shelley Crawford]

Genbox also has relative addressing for multimedia files. That is a
feature
that TMG is lacking and is desired enough that I started a thread on the
topic
a few months ago. Perhaps Genbox didn't have the feature back then, but
nobody
mentioned Genbox at that time. Lack of this feature is one reason for
wanting to
leave TMG. Relative addressing lets one move the whole database without
having
to change imbedded file paths.

I also appreciate that feature - I want to be able to burn my images to a CD
and clear some space on my PC. I also like how it handles multimedia images
better, as each image only has to be entered once and can then be linked to
multiple events if you wanted. Unlike in TMG the captions etc will actually
work for whatever type of event you connect the image to. I found TMG does
all sorts of odd things if you attached the image to an event. If I bought
GENBOX I would actually bother with linking up images. It just hasn't seemed
worth the effort up until now.

Another feature that TMG doesn't have is handling of GIF image files.
These are
important to me as I have census Sources in the form of .gif images.
GENBOX
makes it look as though it handles them in its help section when it says:
"Format
The Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For
image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"".
When I saw that, I thought I had found the program I needed. However,
when put
to the test, it does Not handle .gif images. Jpg & tif are no problem, but
not
gif. I feel lied to and am not happy about that.

Tried attaching GIF files - didn't work for me either. That's quite
misleading.

TMG butchered the creation of the gedcom file and that has made me even
more
concerned about ever getting my data out of TMG intact. The word AGE in
some
notes causes the gedcom to have a "1 AGE" followed by "2 CONT" tags when
that
AGE was part of the Notes only. I see that they still haven't fixed that!

Then the RESI tags are lacking their data! There is another problem, but
it
appears to be an error on the part of GENBOX. One set of notes is
formatted
line by line with desired carriage return-line feeds. Those lines are in
the
Gedcom in separate CONT lines, but GENBOX runs them all together without
the
CR-LF's.

Bob

What do you mean, the RESI tags are lacking their data? All the data, or
only part of it? Mine seem to be OK, I think. I will have to reconnect all
the second principals (who get a duplicate event) and witnesses to each
event, but I expected that and can print lists from TMG of who I will need
to attach to what.

On a related issue - one of the features that GENBOX claims is that it will
export information about witnesses to an event. I haven't tested that out
yet. I have to wonder if other programs will be able to read the data in any
sensible way.

TMG butchered my sources on import, and I haven't finished cleaning that up
yet from last time I changed packages (not that long ago!). GENBOX at least
doesn't seem to have made matters worse, and sources are more readily
searchable than in TMG. It doesn't recognise any of my repositories though.

I have a quibble with how GENBOX determines living people. I don't want to
have to make up estimated birth dates for all my people with sketchy details
five or six generations back, just so that the program will recognise that
they are dead by now!! I plan on asking about that one on the GENBOX mailing
list as there might be some other solution.

I'm still wavering on making the change, but am wavering towards GENBOX.
I've also had a look at Family Historian, Relatively Yours, and a couple of
others, but in my view they don't come near it.

Shelley

[Robert Heiling]

Shelley Crawford wrote in response to [email protected]:

Relative addressing lets one move the whole database without
having to change imbedded file paths.

I also appreciate that feature - I want to be able to burn my images to a CD
and clear some space on my PC. I also like how it handles multimedia images
better, as each image only has to be entered once and can then be linked to
multiple events if you wanted.

I have a folder that I call my database. Within it are 2 subfolders: a folder
for the TMG files and a folder for the images which are then linked to by a
relative path. Any image can be linked to an arbitrary number of times.

Unlike in TMG the captions etc will actually
work for whatever type of event you connect the image to. I found TMG does
all sorts of odd things if you attached the image to an event. If I bought
GENBOX I would actually bother with linking up images. It just hasn't seemed
worth the effort up until now.

That's my case also and I haven't linked enough images due to that
discouragement to have encountered those problems.

What do you mean, the RESI tags are lacking their data? All the data, or
only part of it? Mine seem to be OK, I think. I will have to reconnect all
the second principals (who get a duplicate event) and witnesses to each
event, but I expected that and can print lists from TMG of who I will need
to attach to what.

Part! As an example, I have a person on the screen now with a Residence tag for
the 1920 US census. It shows street address, city, county, state. There is also
a lengthy Memo. All parts are present in the Gedcom and in GENBOX with the
exception of street address which was lost in the export by TMG. GENBOX has
also lost the formatting of my Note as it has done with other text in spite of
my intentional formatting efforts when entering it to TMG..

As a matter of interest, in TMG, that Residence tag shows for the husband as I
entered it. It does not show for his spouse! In GENBOX, it shows for both of
them (I want that), but it does not show for their children (on data entry, I
want the choice as I would tire of entering the same tag multiple times.).

On a related issue - one of the features that GENBOX claims is that it will
export information about witnesses to an event. I haven't tested that out
yet. I have to wonder if other programs will be able to read the data in any
sensible way.

Good question! I haven't been using the witness feature so you're way ahead of
me there, but there are only a handful that have the feature available.

TMG butchered my sources on import, and I haven't finished cleaning that up
yet from last time I changed packages (not that long ago!). GENBOX at least
doesn't seem to have made matters worse, and sources are more readily
searchable than in TMG. It doesn't recognise any of my repositories though.

It seems not to have a master repository list? At least I haven't found it and
probaby need to do more testing.

I have a quibble with how GENBOX determines living people. I don't want to
have to make up estimated birth dates for all my people with sketchy details
five or six generations back, just so that the program will recognise that
they are dead by now!! I plan on asking about that one on the GENBOX mailing
list as there might be some other solution.

You're way ahead of me with the testing.

I'm still wavering on making the change, but am wavering towards GENBOX.
I've also had a look at Family Historian, Relatively Yours, and a couple of
others, but in my view they don't come near it.

It has enough glitches that I've seen already that I haven't much incentive to
move at the moment.

Bob

[maud]

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

As an unhappy TMG user, I too have been test driving GENBOX as I continue my
search for some desired features.

I do like the presentation it has for a person of ALL tags (not just BMD or not
just children) in chronological order like TMG & LEGACY as it gives a complete
picture of an individual. Only programs that have that view available are being
considered.

Genbox also has relative addressing for multimedia files. That is a feature
that TMG is lacking and is desired enough that I started a thread on the topic
a few months ago. Perhaps Genbox didn't have the feature back then, but nobody
mentioned Genbox at that time. Lack of this feature is one reason for wanting to
leave TMG. Relative addressing lets one move the whole database without having
to change imbedded file paths.

Another feature that TMG doesn't have is handling of GIF image files. These are
important to me as I have census Sources in the form of .gif images. GENBOX
makes it look as though it handles them in its help section when it says:
"Format
The Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"".
When I saw that, I thought I had found the program I needed. However, when put
to the test, it does Not handle .gif images. Jpg & tif are no problem, but not
gif. I feel lied to and am not happy about that.

I asked Bill (the Genbox developer) about this gif issue, as I had
been confused by it too.
I received this reply from him this morning:-

"GIF was not a supported file type, because UNISYS had a patent on the
LZW compression algoritm used by GIF files (Patent #4,558,302). They
required payment of license fees for every program that used GIF
files. That means I would have to pay them a percentage of every
Genbox sale, with a $2500 registration fee up front.

Happily, the last UNISYS LZW patent expired on July 7, 2004. That
opens the way for GIF support, which I've implemented in the next
version. So now, GIF is an officially supported image type for Genbox.
"

Now happily awaiting the next release, which given past form will not
be too far away....


Julia

[Robert Heiling]

maud wrote:

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

snip

Another feature that TMG doesn't have is handling of GIF image files. These are
important to me as I have census Sources in the form of .gif images. GENBOX
makes it look as though it handles them in its help section when it says:
"Format
The Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"".
When I saw that, I thought I had found the program I needed. However, when put
to the test, it does Not handle .gif images. Jpg & tif are no problem, but not
gif. I feel lied to and am not happy about that.


I asked Bill (the Genbox developer) about this gif issue, as I had
been confused by it too.
I received this reply from him this morning:-

"GIF was not a supported file type, because UNISYS had a patent on the
LZW compression algoritm used by GIF files (Patent #4,558,302). They
required payment of license fees for every program that used GIF
files. That means I would have to pay them a percentage of every
Genbox sale, with a $2500 registration fee up front.

Happily, the last UNISYS LZW patent expired on July 7, 2004. That
opens the way for GIF support, which I've implemented in the next
version. So now, GIF is an officially supported image type for Genbox.
"

Yes, that's right. I had previously researched that topic and was aware of the patent issue. I
had had a discussion here in this newsgroup with Bob Velke earlier this year in regards to his
supporting the .gif format after July, but he was non-committal about a schedule. The patent
itself would not have precluded having the code written & tested and ready to go, but not enabled
for the user. That way it could be turned loose at any time by a program patch.

Now happily awaiting the next release, which given past form will not
be too far away.

I had been even more unhappy with the fact that Genbox represented itself as supporting .gif when
it didn't than I was with the actual lack of support. In any event, I saw enough general
problems in my testing as to not be eager to leap from the frying pan into the fire and will
stick with TMG for the time being.

Thanks for the info!

Bob

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:55:21 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]>
wrote:

maud wrote:

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

snip

Another feature that TMG doesn't have is handling of GIF image files. These are
important to me as I have census Sources in the form of .gif images. GENBOX
makes it look as though it handles them in its help section when it says:
"Format
The Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"".
When I saw that, I thought I had found the program I needed. However, when put
to the test, it does Not handle .gif images. Jpg & tif are no problem, but not
gif. I feel lied to and am not happy about that.


I asked Bill (the Genbox developer) about this gif issue, as I had
been confused by it too.
I received this reply from him this morning:-

"GIF was not a supported file type, because UNISYS had a patent on the
LZW compression algoritm used by GIF files (Patent #4,558,302). They
required payment of license fees for every program that used GIF
files. That means I would have to pay them a percentage of every
Genbox sale, with a $2500 registration fee up front.

Happily, the last UNISYS LZW patent expired on July 7, 2004. That
opens the way for GIF support, which I've implemented in the next
version. So now, GIF is an officially supported image type for Genbox.
"

Yes, that's right. I had previously researched that topic and was aware of the patent issue. I
had had a discussion here in this newsgroup with Bob Velke earlier this year in regards to his
supporting the .gif format after July, but he was non-committal about a schedule. The patent
itself would not have precluded having the code written & tested and ready to go, but not enabled
for the user. That way it could be turned loose at any time by a program patch.

Now happily awaiting the next release, which given past form will not
be too far away.

I had been even more unhappy with the fact that Genbox represented itself as supporting .gif when
it didn't than I was with the actual lack of support. In any event, I saw enough general
problems in my testing as to not be eager to leap from the frying pan into the fire and will
stick with TMG for the time being.

Thanks for the info!

Bob

Bruce Buzzbee discussed the GIF problem way back when Family Origins
was his baby. He was just anxiously waiting for the patent to expire
as I recall.

Hugh

[Robert Heiling]

"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote:

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:55:21 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]
wrote:

maud wrote:

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

snip

Another feature that TMG doesn't have is handling of GIF image files. These are
important to me as I have census Sources in the form of .gif images. GENBOX
makes it look as though it handles them in its help section when it says:
"Format
The Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"".
When I saw that, I thought I had found the program I needed. However, when put
to the test, it does Not handle .gif images. Jpg & tif are no problem, but not
gif. I feel lied to and am not happy about that.


I asked Bill (the Genbox developer) about this gif issue, as I had
been confused by it too.
I received this reply from him this morning:-

"GIF was not a supported file type, because UNISYS had a patent on the
LZW compression algoritm used by GIF files (Patent #4,558,302). They
required payment of license fees for every program that used GIF
files. That means I would have to pay them a percentage of every
Genbox sale, with a $2500 registration fee up front.

Happily, the last UNISYS LZW patent expired on July 7, 2004. That
opens the way for GIF support, which I've implemented in the next
version. So now, GIF is an officially supported image type for Genbox.
"

Yes, that's right. I had previously researched that topic and was aware of the patent issue. I
had had a discussion here in this newsgroup with Bob Velke earlier this year in regards to his
supporting the .gif format after July, but he was non-committal about a schedule. The patent
itself would not have precluded having the code written & tested and ready to go, but not enabled
for the user. That way it could be turned loose at any time by a program patch.

Now happily awaiting the next release, which given past form will not
be too far away.

I had been even more unhappy with the fact that Genbox represented itself as supporting .gif when
it didn't than I was with the actual lack of support. In any event, I saw enough general
problems in my testing as to not be eager to leap from the frying pan into the fire and will
stick with TMG for the time being.

Thanks for the info!

Bob

Bruce Buzzbee discussed the GIF problem way back when Family Origins
was his baby. He was just anxiously waiting for the patent to expire
as I recall.

That certainly adds to my observation that these companies are sadly undercapitalized. $2500 is a
drop in the bucket to a firm that is sufficiently capitalized and serious about producing quality
genealogy software. Another poster on a different thread has expressed a desire for a genie program
that contains the features of a full photograph management program. To my mind it is an obvious
reequirement for a genealogy program. Why don't we have one? Lack of imagination & foresight? and/or
lack of the money to hire programming talent to implement various features. Water water everywhere,
but not a drop to drink.

Bob

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:29:46 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]>
wrote:

"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote:

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:55:21 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]
wrote:

maud wrote:

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

snip

Another feature that TMG doesn't have is handling of GIF image files. These are
important to me as I have census Sources in the form of .gif images. GENBOX
makes it look as though it handles them in its help section when it says:
"Format
The Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"".
When I saw that, I thought I had found the program I needed. However, when put
to the test, it does Not handle .gif images. Jpg & tif are no problem, but not
gif. I feel lied to and am not happy about that.


I asked Bill (the Genbox developer) about this gif issue, as I had
been confused by it too.
I received this reply from him this morning:-

"GIF was not a supported file type, because UNISYS had a patent on the
LZW compression algoritm used by GIF files (Patent #4,558,302). They
required payment of license fees for every program that used GIF
files. That means I would have to pay them a percentage of every
Genbox sale, with a $2500 registration fee up front.

Happily, the last UNISYS LZW patent expired on July 7, 2004. That
opens the way for GIF support, which I've implemented in the next
version. So now, GIF is an officially supported image type for Genbox.
"

Yes, that's right. I had previously researched that topic and was aware of the patent issue. I
had had a discussion here in this newsgroup with Bob Velke earlier this year in regards to his
supporting the .gif format after July, but he was non-committal about a schedule. The patent
itself would not have precluded having the code written & tested and ready to go, but not enabled
for the user. That way it could be turned loose at any time by a program patch.

Now happily awaiting the next release, which given past form will not
be too far away.

I had been even more unhappy with the fact that Genbox represented itself as supporting .gif when
it didn't than I was with the actual lack of support. In any event, I saw enough general
problems in my testing as to not be eager to leap from the frying pan into the fire and will
stick with TMG for the time being.

Thanks for the info!

Bob

Bruce Buzzbee discussed the GIF problem way back when Family Origins
was his baby. He was just anxiously waiting for the patent to expire
as I recall.

That certainly adds to my observation that these companies are sadly undercapitalized. $2500 is a
drop in the bucket to a firm that is sufficiently capitalized and serious about producing quality
genealogy software. Another poster on a different thread has expressed a desire for a genie program
that contains the features of a full photograph management program. To my mind it is an obvious
reequirement for a genealogy program. Why don't we have one? Lack of imagination & foresight? and/or
lack of the money to hire programming talent to implement various features. Water water everywhere,
but not a drop to drink.

Bob

I can't speak for Bruce of course but it appears to me that he would
have to sell 125-150 programs just to recover the cost and all that
would not flow to the bottom line - which is probably his grocery
money.

Also, look at the programs we use - not many appear to be
multi-national corporations. In fact we know most of the people by
their first (or middle) names.

I have no inside information but I doubt that any of the
programmers/owners (maybe except Bob Velke) have chateaus on the
Riviera. If they do why don't they hire someone else to monitor
genealogy forums?

And, deferring the addition of some features leaves something to sell
the next upgrade.

I'm sure all genealogists are not as sophisticated as you and, in
comparison, our requirements would be minimal.

This sounds like I'm taking their side - but I'm really just talking
to myself trying to understand why they don't do as you say.

Hugh

[Robert Heiling]

"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote:

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:29:46 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]
wrote:

"J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote:

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:55:21 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]
wrote:

maud wrote:

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

snip

Another feature that TMG doesn't have is handling of GIF image files. These are
important to me as I have census Sources in the form of .gif images. GENBOX
makes it look as though it handles them in its help section when it says:
"Format
The Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"".
When I saw that, I thought I had found the program I needed. However, when put
to the test, it does Not handle .gif images. Jpg & tif are no problem, but not
gif. I feel lied to and am not happy about that.


I asked Bill (the Genbox developer) about this gif issue, as I had
been confused by it too.
I received this reply from him this morning:-

"GIF was not a supported file type, because UNISYS had a patent on the
LZW compression algoritm used by GIF files (Patent #4,558,302). They
required payment of license fees for every program that used GIF
files. That means I would have to pay them a percentage of every
Genbox sale, with a $2500 registration fee up front.

Happily, the last UNISYS LZW patent expired on July 7, 2004. That
opens the way for GIF support, which I've implemented in the next
version. So now, GIF is an officially supported image type for Genbox.
"

Yes, that's right. I had previously researched that topic and was aware of the patent issue. I
had had a discussion here in this newsgroup with Bob Velke earlier this year in regards to his
supporting the .gif format after July, but he was non-committal about a schedule. The patent
itself would not have precluded having the code written & tested and ready to go, but not enabled
for the user. That way it could be turned loose at any time by a program patch.

Now happily awaiting the next release, which given past form will not
be too far away.

I had been even more unhappy with the fact that Genbox represented itself as supporting .gif when
it didn't than I was with the actual lack of support. In any event, I saw enough general
problems in my testing as to not be eager to leap from the frying pan into the fire and will
stick with TMG for the time being.

Thanks for the info!

Bob

Bruce Buzzbee discussed the GIF problem way back when Family Origins
was his baby. He was just anxiously waiting for the patent to expire
as I recall.

That certainly adds to my observation that these companies are sadly undercapitalized. $2500 is a
drop in the bucket to a firm that is sufficiently capitalized and serious about producing quality
genealogy software. Another poster on a different thread has expressed a desire for a genie program
that contains the features of a full photograph management program. To my mind it is an obvious
reequirement for a genealogy program. Why don't we have one? Lack of imagination & foresight? and/or
lack of the money to hire programming talent to implement various features. Water water everywhere,
but not a drop to drink.

Bob

I can't speak for Bruce of course but it appears to me that he would
have to sell 125-150 programs just to recover the cost and all that
would not flow to the bottom line - which is probably his grocery
money.

You're making my point for me.

Also, look at the programs we use - not many appear to be
multi-national corporations. In fact we know most of the people by
their first (or middle) names.

FTM might come closest, but I suspect they're making enough profit as is with their current business
model. The LDS Church would only be interested in filling the church members religious needs with PAF.
Those are the ones with finances as I see it. The rest would appear to be me-too operations started on a
shoestring from a spare bedroom.

I have no inside information but I doubt that any of the
programmers/owners (maybe except Bob Velke) have chateaus on the
Riviera. If they do why don't they hire someone else to monitor
genealogy forums?

And, deferring the addition of some features leaves something to sell
the next upgrade.

I'm sure all genealogists are not as sophisticated as you and, in
comparison, our requirements would be minimal.

Ummm, sticking to the topic, I suggest you read (or reread) the excellent post: "Genealogy SW with Good
Photo Meta-Data Management" by David Bakken where he says:

"
Other capabilities are no doubt possible regarding smart managing of
photos in genealogy programs. I guess I am making an assumption here,
that entering a family's history of photos is an activity that is part
and parcel to genealogy. Stated otherwise, it would be sad (even
tragic) to have to get an advanced photo management software package
to have nice photo management, because it seems that you would lose so
much useful genealogical information that could be captured if the
genealogy and photo management were integrated into the same package.
But maybe today's software does not support this very well yet.
"

This sounds like I'm taking their side - but I'm really just talking
to myself trying to understand why they don't do as you say.

Perhaps somebody will and leave the others far behind? I'll be a customer when they do.

Bob

[Robert Heiling]

Bob Velke wrote:

snip>.

GIF support (and other forms of LZW compression) will be in the next
release of TMG.

That begs the obvious question.

Bob

[Dave Hinz]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 19:11:19 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote:

Bob Velke wrote:

snip>.

GIF support (and other forms of LZW compression) will be in the next
release of TMG.

That begs the obvious question.

ooh, ooh, I know, let me answer it.

"When it's ready. As it should be. You wouldn't want it any other way".

Dave "How'd I do, Bob?" Hinz

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On 20 Oct 2004 19:18:37 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 19:11:19 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote:
Bob Velke wrote:

snip>.

GIF support (and other forms of LZW compression) will be in the next
release of TMG.

That begs the obvious question.

ooh, ooh, I know, let me answer it.

"When it's ready. As it should be. You wouldn't want it any other way".

Dave "How'd I do, Bob?" Hinz

No doubt I have posted too much on this already. BUT,

I still consider computers and programming a miracle; I think most of
the majoir players provide a real service (except for Dennis who has
his data on Excel - but gosh! Excel is a program!

If one reads the program user groups he sees a hodge-podge of
suggestions - a few even reasonable and some impossible!

I remember when people used a Comptometer and a full-bank Sundstrand.
Program was what you couldn't tell the players without. Now we have
programs which do everything except (fill in your favorite phrase
here).

My bottom line is that I think the people we talk about are very
conscious of the bottom line and make their best effort to satisfy
customers. At least it's a logical philosophy.

Hugh

[Dave Hinz]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:30:07 GMT, J. Hugh Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote:

On 20 Oct 2004 19:18:37 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:


ooh, ooh, I know, let me answer it.
"When it's ready. As it should be. You wouldn't want it any other way".

My bottom line is that I think the people we talk about are very
conscious of the bottom line and make their best effort to satisfy
customers. At least it's a logical philosophy.

Yes, to be successful in the software world (I'm defining successful here
as having a good, solid, respectable product, not definign it in the
Microsoft definition of "sells a shitload of copies"), you have to find
out what the customers want, and balance those wants with the effort
involved to implement the features desired, compared with the support
issues that may cause, balanced with the cost of doing it and the risk of
not doing it. If you make the right decisions, and do it well, people
will respect you and buy your product. If you design around the wrong
features, or the right features poorly, your market will be limited to the
uninformed consumer that buys whatever the heck version of whatever the
heck program they find on the shelves of their local computer retailer.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone complain about Bob's software, certainly
never seen any comments of "not well thought out" or "poorly implemented".
In a group of people as cantankerous as genealogists, that says alot.

Dave Hinz

[Dave Hinz]

On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:51:13 +0000 (UTC), Bob Velke <[email protected]> wrote:

Bob said:

That begs the obvious question.

What he said. (Thanks, Dave)

No problem, glad to have helped.

Dave

[Bob Velke]

Hugh said:

I have no inside information but I doubt that any of the
programmers/owners (maybe except Bob Velke) have chateaus on the
Riviera.

Oh, sure.

This sounds like I'm taking their side - but I'm really just talking
to myself trying to understand why they don't do as you say.

Since you asked <g>... although the GIF patent expired in the U.S. last
year, it didn't expire in other countries in which TMG is sold until this
summer.

GIF support (and other forms of LZW compression) will be in the next
release of TMG.

Bob Velke
Wholly Genes Software
http://www.whollygenes.com

[Bob Velke]

Bob said:

That begs the obvious question.

What he said.

(Thanks, Dave)

Bob Velke
Wholly Genes Software
http://www.whollygenes.com

[Robert Heiling]

Dave Hinz wrote:

snip

I don't think I've ever seen anyone complain about Bob's software, certainly
never seen any comments of "not well thought out" or "poorly implemented".
In a group of people as cantankerous as genealogists, that says alot.

Sorry Dave, but I've never gone along with that notion. My perception is from the
standpoint of my career in software design & development. That involved, among other
things, the practice of top-down structured design, peer review, test plans, blah blah
blah..

I started with the DOS version of TMG and have been with it to the present day. My
only reason for buying it was that there were a number of people in the Compuserve
forums in the late 90's like Cliff Watts, who were constantly saying that TMG was the
best genealogy program. I wanted the best, so I bought it. How was I to know?

I watched the agony they were going through in the transition from DOS to Windows.
They were having a lot of trouble adapting. It was only a couple of months ago that I
reported what must have been another leftover case where there was no paste option
from the mouse and ctl-v was required. It's too bad I hadn't known that this
discussion would take place or I might have logged all the problems over the years. In
any case, my opinion is that TMG is buggy software and poorly tested.

They have also been unresponsive to a problem I've had for quite some time. In the
Simple Picklist of individuals, if I use the arrow to scroll, the list scrolls nicely
for a brief instant and then suddenly scrolls at a blindingly unusable speed. I even
went to the effort of making an official bug report, but . . . I don't have that
problem with any other software including the equivalent list in Genbox.

So I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with your statements. There are aspects of TMG
that I like and others that I don't, but I have been looking for an alternative. What
I fear most is committing too much to TMG and never being able to get my data out.

Bob

[Neil Bell]

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:29:35 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]>
wrote:

So I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with your statements. There are aspects of TMG
that I like and others that I don't, but I have been looking for an alternative. What
I fear most is committing too much to TMG and never being able to get my data out.

Bob

I was a happy TMG user for many many years also. My daughter first
started using Legacy and she loved the ease of use and flexibility. I
took a look at Legacy and sure enough she was right. She asked me to
move my extensive TMG data into Legacy for her use. It took me a
little planning and effort to move my TMG data over to Legacy for her
to use. There were a few problem areas (like the use of "Witnesses").
However these were overcome and she was very pleased. I began
experimenting with Legacy more and more and found the design and
features were steadily improving and their user responsiveness was
outstanding.

For a time I tried keeping my TMG and Legacy databases synchronized.
While this worked, the effort didn't seem to be justified since
everything I wanted to do with TMG, I could do more easily and far,
far faster with Legacy.

Does Legacy do everything I could possibly ask for .. of course not,
no program does that for every user. However the folks at Legacy are
more than receptive for change suggestions, offer far more frequent
updates and do not react negatively to criticisms - they welcome them.

I have used genealogy programs since the old Comsoft "Roots" days. I
went through the transition when Commsoft sold their program rights
and the subsequent fiasco software which followed that. I switched
over to TMG and used it for a long time and enjoyed its flexibility
but felt increasingly unhappy as the ease of use suffered
significantly.

I decided that (for me) the future is now clearly with Legacy and I
have stopped all use of TMG. I am extremely happy that I finally made
that decision. I have made a number of suggestions to Ken and Dave at
Legacy and they ALWAYS been extremely receptive to them.

Give Legacy a shot at meeting your needs. I don't think you will
regret it. The "learning curve" is fairly gentle and the rewards are
considerable.

Neil Bell
Neil Bell

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully
as when they do it from religious conviction."
-- Blaise Pascal

For e-mail replies remove the "notreally."

[Robert Heiling]

Neil Bell wrote:

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:29:35 GMT, Robert Heiling <[email protected]
wrote:

So I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with your statements. There are aspects of TMG
that I like and others that I don't, but I have been looking for an alternative. What
I fear most is committing too much to TMG and never being able to get my data out.

Bob

I was a happy TMG user for many many years also. My daughter first
started using Legacy and she loved the ease of use and flexibility. I
took a look at Legacy and sure enough she was right.
SNIP

I decided that (for me) the future is now clearly with Legacy and I
have stopped all use of TMG. I am extremely happy that I finally made
that decision. I have made a number of suggestions to Ken and Dave at
Legacy and they ALWAYS been extremely receptive to them.

Give Legacy a shot at meeting your needs. I don't think you will
regret it. The "learning curve" is fairly gentle and the rewards are
considerable.

Thanks Neil

I've had Legacy 5 on my system since last Dec when I downloaded it for a test drive. It's
a pretty decent piece of software and I don't believe that I've encountered any serious
problems. However, as matter of that intangible thing called personal choice, it's not
for me.

Bob

[wim prange]

Hi Robert,

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

<snip>

I had been even more unhappy with the fact that Genbox represented itself
as supporting .gif when
it didn't than I was with the actual lack of support. In any event, I saw
enough general
problems in my testing as to not be eager to leap from the frying pan into
the fire and will
stick with TMG for the time being.

Just to set things straight: Genbox didn't "represent itself as supporting
..gif when it didn't". In the helpfile there is a list of supported
mediafiles, GIF wasn't among them in the (now previous) helpfile. There was
one reference to GIF in the old helpfile: the portion that Maud cited. It
merely stated there that the format-box on the Media-View could contain and
display the *word* GIF if you had selected such a file. Like it would do
with PDF when you had selected that, or XLS when you had selected an
excel-file. As with GÏF, it wouldn't display the contents of these files
either but just only a container for these files.
It's all history now because of today Genbox does support the GIF-format
(and there are now two references to GIF in the helpfile, the second being
in the list of supported mediafiles

As for me, I'm glad I've take the leap from the frying pan last year. I've
never been happier with a genealogy-program. I agree, there are issues with
Genbox. Which program hasn't? It's the way the developer deals with such
issues, plus the speed these issues get resolved that have made me decide to
take the leap (and never look back).

Best of luck,

Wim

[Robert Heiling]

wim prange wrote:

Hi Robert,

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
snip
I had been even more unhappy with the fact that Genbox represented itself
as supporting .gif when
it didn't than I was with the actual lack of support. In any event, I saw
enough general
problems in my testing as to not be eager to leap from the frying pan into
the fire and will
stick with TMG for the time being.

Just to set things straight: Genbox didn't "represent itself as supporting
.gif when it didn't". In the helpfile there is a list of supported
mediafiles, GIF wasn't among them in the (now previous) helpfile. There was
one reference to GIF in the old helpfile: the portion that Maud cited. It
merely stated there that the format-box on the Media-View could contain and
display the *word* GIF if you had selected such a file. Like it would do
with PDF when you had selected that, or XLS when you had selected an
excel-file. As with GÏF, it wouldn't display the contents of these files
either but just only a container for these files.

Hi William. I'm not buying that explanation. As I quoted previously: "The
Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"" tells the viewer that a GIF
*already is* a "linked multimedia file"(already in your database). Why would I
look any further?

It's all history now because of today Genbox does support the GIF-format
(and there are now two references to GIF in the helpfile, the second being
in the list of supported mediafiles

That developer is a bit speedier that some. and perhaps he also has his
finger on the pulse?<wry grin>

As for me, I'm glad I've take the leap from the frying pan last year. I've
never been happier with a genealogy-program. I agree, there are issues with
Genbox. Which program hasn't?

Certainly, but I would expect to find those issues after using it for some
time, not staring me in the face (like the lose of formatting in Notes/Memos)
on a brief testdrive. For all I know, they may consider that to be the *right
way*. How in the world could they let something so obvious get through?

It's the way the developer deals with such
issues, plus the speed these issues get resolved that have made me decide to
take the leap (and never look back).

I said previously that there were some things that I like about TMG and one is
the Person view showing the events arranged from birth to death, *including the
children*, in chronological order. The Summary screen in Genbox forces the eye
to bounce up & down between the Children & Event portions. Perhaps there is
another view like the TMG one, but I haven't found it.

Bob

[wim prange]

Hi Bob,

"Robert Heiling" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

Hi William. I'm not buying that explanation. As I quoted previously:
"The
Format box displays the format type of the linked multimedia file. For
image
files, it might display "BMP", "GIF" or "JPG"" tells the viewer that a GIF
*already is* a "linked multimedia file"(already in your database). Why
would I
look any further?

Even in the previous version, you *were* able to *link* gif-files in the
Media-table in Genbox. You could give them titles and captions, describe
them, flag them, etc. The only thing that was different with a bmp-, jpeg-,
tiff-, or several other image-files was: you couldn't preview it in Genbox
itself. You could set in preferences that you wanted to open image-files
with your default image-viewer. A click on a button would then open the file
in that viewer, as it would do with pdf-files in Acrobat and xls-files in
Excel.

But as I said before, it's allready history.

Certainly, but I would expect to find those issues after using it for some
time, not staring me in the face (like the lose of formatting in
Notes/Memos)

I just exported a testfile with TMG v 5.11.00 and I couldn't get any
formatting codes in the ged-file. Maybe I missed some setting but for now,
I'm afraid it's a problem with TMG. Too bad ofcourse. Please report what I
did wrong in that case so I can check it and report that. I'm sure Bill will
have it fixed in no time.

I said previously that there were some things that I like about TMG and
one is
the Person view showing the events arranged from birth to death,
*including the
children*, in chronological order. The Summary screen in Genbox forces
the eye
to bounce up & down between the Children & Event portions. Perhaps there
is
another view like the TMG one, but I haven't found it.

Genbox does show all events, incl. childbirths, chronologically (or, and
that's my preference, with self-defined basic events first). Granted, it
doesn't show the child's name at that particular place. But, instead of
that: I have "cell-editing". I can add or edit all the basic information on
this Individuals Summary View without having to open a new dialog every
time. There has been a request just recently for a "name plus place"-style
just recently. It could be Bill will implement such a thing (haven't seen
any comment from him yet) but when I would loose the cell-editing through
that choice, then I would prefer the current situation.

Just to name a few of the other things I like about Genbox:
I can attach sourcecitations to any field and in notes to any seperate fact,
not just the entire tag/event/note. In general, I love the sourcing
capabalities of Genbox. If you're interested, take a look at
http://genbox.zog.org/2004/07/working_with_so.html. Michel has written a
short manual which covers some of these capabilities. Especially take a look
at the Evidence/Exerpt section, I think it's awesome.
I can preview event-sentences, incl citations, incl. formatting, without
having to generate a report.
I love the hierarchical places scheme.

Best of luck,

Wim

[Robert Heiling]

wim prange wrote:

"Robert Heiling" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

Hi Bill

Even in the previous version, <snip
But as I said before, it's allready history.

That discussion has become rather circular so I'll drop it. In fairness to
history, it should be noted that LEGACY has had GIF support for some time, and I
quote: "GIF support can be purchased separately from Millennia for $5.00 to help
cover the license royalty we must pay." Very sensible! That's in version 5
which I downloaded in Dec 2003 and I don't know how long prior to that they had
the support.

Certainly, but I would expect to find those issues after using it for some
time, not staring me in the face (like the lose of formatting in
Notes/Memos)

I just exported a testfile with TMG v 5.11.00 and I couldn't get any
formatting codes in the ged-file. Maybe I missed some setting but for now,
I'm afraid it's a problem with TMG. Too bad ofcourse. Please report what I
did wrong in that case so I can check it and report that. I'm sure Bill will
have it fixed in no time.

1 NAME Effie Julia /Jones/
2 GIVN Effie Julia
2 SURN Jones
2 NOTE Death Certificate #123, Los Angeles County, CA
3 CONT
3 CONT Jones, Effie C.
3 CONT Female/White/Divorced
3 CONT Spouse: Jason S. Jones
3 CONT AGE 70 years-5 mths-2 days
etc

Not a TMG problem. That line by line formatting is how it appears in TMG &
Gedcom. Genbox is handling the CONT as though it were a CONC and running
everything together. How much testing do they do?

I said previously that there were some things that I like about TMG and
one is
the Person view showing the events arranged from birth to death,
*including the
children*, in chronological order. The Summary screen in Genbox forces
the eye
to bounce up & down between the Children & Event portions. Perhaps there
is
another view like the TMG one, but I haven't found it.

Genbox does show all events, incl. childbirths, chronologically (or, and
that's my preference, with self-defined basic events first). Granted, it
doesn't show the child's name at that particular place.

That's why I don't care for that particular presentation. As I said, I like the
TMG presentation. I guess it's just a matter of personal preference.

But, instead of
that: I have "cell-editing". I can add or edit all the basic information on
this Individuals Summary View without having to open a new dialog every
time. There has been a request just recently for a "name plus place"-style
just recently. It could be Bill will implement such a thing (haven't seen
any comment from him yet) but when I would loose the cell-editing through
that choice, then I would prefer the current situation.

The Helpfile didn't contain the terms cell or cell-editing, so I don't quite
understand that, but how does adding a child's name to the line interfere with
editing?

Just to name a few of the other things I like about Genbox: <snip

That's all well & good, but if I don't like the grille on a new car I won't buy
it even though it has great handling, acceleration, and good appearance
otherwise.

Bob

[wim prange]

"Robert Heiling" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

1 NAME Effie Julia /Jones/
2 GIVN Effie Julia
2 SURN Jones
2 NOTE Death Certificate #123, Los Angeles County, CA
3 CONT
3 CONT Jones, Effie C.
3 CONT Female/White/Divorced
3 CONT Spouse: Jason S. Jones
3 CONT AGE 70 years-5 mths-2 days
etc

Not a TMG problem. That line by line formatting is how it appears in TMG &
Gedcom. Genbox is handling the CONT as though it were a CONC and running
everything together. How much testing do they do?

First: then why doesn't TMG use the CONC where appropiate? I ran the test
with a lengthy note: the entire note was exported using CONT, I hadn't used
any [CR]-code at all. It seems to me the problem is that TMG is handling
CONT as though it were CONC.

Second: in Genbox is an option to tackle this problem: tick the box "Retain
hard line breaks" when importing the gedcom.

Third: I thought you were referring to formatting codes like bold, italic,
etc. Why doesn't TMG export that information?

<snip>

The Helpfile didn't contain the terms cell or cell-editing, so I don't
quite
understand that, but how does adding a child's name to the line interfere
with
editing?

That particular field you are viewing in TMG consists of the contents of a
couple of datafields: name, place and notes. When Genbox would have that TMG
presentation plus the ability to edit the content of that field directly
(which I like very much), which datafield should it enter: the name, the
place, or the notefield? And how would you know which field you are editing?
I'm no programmer but I think this would be difficult to tackle. Bill might
have other ideas though.

Just to name a few of the other things I like about Genbox: <snip

That's all well & good, but if I don't like the grille on a new car I
won't buy
it even though it has great handling, acceleration, and good appearance
otherwise.

Whatever makes you happy

Gr. Wim

[Robert Heiling]

wim prange wrote:

"Robert Heiling" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...
1 NAME Effie Julia /Jones/
2 GIVN Effie Julia
2 SURN Jones
2 NOTE Death Certificate #123, Los Angeles County, CA
3 CONT
3 CONT Jones, Effie C.
3 CONT Female/White/Divorced
3 CONT Spouse: Jason S. Jones
3 CONT AGE 70 years-5 mths-2 days
etc

Not a TMG problem. That line by line formatting is how it appears in TMG &
Gedcom. Genbox is handling the CONT as though it were a CONC and running
everything together. How much testing do they do?

First: then why doesn't TMG use the CONC where appropiate? I ran the test
with a lengthy note: the entire note was exported using CONT, I hadn't used
any [CR]-code at all. It seems to me the problem is that TMG is handling
CONT as though it were CONC.

Even if it were and I haven't seen your note to know, I had been addressing a
problem with Genbox import there, not TMG!

Second: in Genbox is an option to tackle this problem: tick the box "Retain
hard line breaks" when importing the gedcom.

Third: I thought you were referring to formatting codes like bold, italic,
etc. Why doesn't TMG export that information?

I hadn't been meaning formatting in that sense and it seems to me that you knew
that since you said: above "I hadn't used any [CR]-code at all.".

snip
The Helpfile didn't contain the terms cell or cell-editing, so I don't
quite
understand that, but how does adding a child's name to the line interfere
with
editing?

That particular field you are viewing in TMG consists of the contents of a
couple of datafields: name, place and notes. When Genbox would have that TMG
presentation plus the ability to edit the content of that field directly
(which I like very much), which datafield should it enter: the name, the
place, or the notefield? And how would you know which field you are editing?
I'm no programmer but I think this would be difficult to tackle. Bill might
have other ideas though.

I think I'll let him figure that out.

Just to name a few of the other things I like about Genbox: <snip

That's all well & good, but if I don't like the grille on a new car I
won't buy
it even though it has great handling, acceleration, and good appearance
otherwise.

Whatever makes you happy

Among other things.

Bob

[wim prange]

"Robert Heiling" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

Even if it were and I haven't seen your note to know, I had been
addressing a
problem with Genbox import there, not TMG!

And I'm replying that your problem is caused by TMG-export plus that you
hadn't ticked "retain hard lines". I suggest you or other TMG-users report
this to Bob.

<snip>

I hadn't been meaning formatting in that sense and it seems to me that you
knew
that since you said: above "I hadn't used any [CR]-code at all.".

Why is that? If I knew you had troubles with the CONT-tag, I would have
replied like I have in my previous post.

Best of luck,

Gr. Wim

[Robert Heiling]

My apologies. I've been addressing you as William and Bill. It might be time to
change my newsreader's font.<g>

wim prange wrote:

"Robert Heiling" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

Even if it were and I haven't seen your note to know, I had been
addressing a
problem with Genbox import there, not TMG!

And I'm replying that your problem is caused by TMG-export plus that you
hadn't ticked "retain hard lines". I suggest you or other TMG-users report
this to Bob.

That's strange. Just for giggles, I imported that TMG gedcom into FTM & PAF
just now and didn't have to set anything special at all! I only told them to
import the gedcom. Those notes look just fine in both of them. So the score now
is TMG, FTM, & PAF have it right. GENBOX has it wrong.

snip
I hadn't been meaning formatting in that sense and it seems to me that you
knew
that since you said: above "I hadn't used any [CR]-code at all.".

Why is that? If I knew you had troubles with the CONT-tag, I would have
replied like I have in my previous post.

? Shrug.

Bob

[wim prange]

"Robert Heiling" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

<snip>

That's strange. Just for giggles, I imported that TMG gedcom into FTM &
PAF
just now and didn't have to set anything special at all! I only told them
to
import the gedcom. Those notes look just fine in both of them. So the
score now
is TMG, FTM, & PAF have it right. GENBOX has it wrong.

And did the rest of the notes come through like you entered them in TMG as
well?

Just for giggles, I imported my TMG-generated gedcom file into Legacy and
guess what ... My notes were changed into modern poetry: sentences were
truncated at strange places. I'm not a poet and it wasn't the way I had
entered my memo in TMG. Legacy's fault? No. I had to set some rewrapping
option and that particular memo did get through okay. Ofcourse there was now
a problem somewhere else. Memo's containing a couple of paragraphs were
changed to a single paragraph.

Just for 'giggles' (allthough feeling sorry for the TMG-users should be more
appropiate), I've searched TMG's mailinglist on Rootsweb. Apparantly the
problem was already reported at least twice. See messages below. Also, take
a look at the dates: 18 Dec 1999 - apparantly no reply because the original
poster posted the same message again on 13 Mar 2000 - and 12 Jul 2000.

Best of luck
Wim


=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 09:17:23 +0100
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ole_Bj=F8rn_Darrud?= <snipped e-mailaddress>
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Subject: GEDCOM export and CONC/CONT (was TMG-L: RE: Transfering long note
s from PAF via Gedcom to TMG)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

HI
regarding TMG and CONC/CONT I and other Norwegian users have come to the
conclusion that TMG does not follow GEDCOM spec's.
When exporting, TMG one-sided uses CONT imposing forced lineshifts where
there are none in the paragraphs made in the notes of TMG.
The problem with this is that the settings made in TMG (Paragraphs and
lineshits) are ruined when exporting to other programs.
As far as I can interpret GEDCOM, CONT should only be used when the user has
put lineshifts into the text. Else CONC should be used.
So far TMG support have suggested that you buy the program "GEDCOM explorer"
to fix this "bug" in the GEDCOM-file before importing it to another program.
They maintain that this is not a bug but a fix to amend GEDCOM shortcomings
(wordwrap and cut-off of words).
For a serious program like TMG I/we find it strange that the rules of GEDCOM
are broken (at least this is my/our understanding). Along with other users
in Norway we have appoached TMG and asked them to fix it.
Any comments from this knowledgeable group?
Regards
Ole Bjørn
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
TMG-L The Internet Mailing List for The Master
Genealogist
To unsubscribe: Send an e-mail to [email protected] with 'UNSUBSCRIBE
TMG-L'
or... if you get the digest version: 'UNSUBSCRIBE
TMG-L-DIGEST'
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

______________________________
------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 21:41:59 +0100
From: "Wade T. Oram" <snipped e-mailaddress>
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Subject: [TMG] Exporting memos to GEDCOM doesn't comply with GedCom 5.5
standard

Hello,

I am having a problem with the gedcom export of TMG's memo's
particularly in relation to Notes Tags.

Many of my notes are free text with long paragraphs. As I would expect,
these paragraphs are being split into multiple lines when exported to
GEDCOM. However, they are being split using the gedcom CONT TAG instead
of the gedcom CONC TAG. This means that when the notes are imported to
any gedcom compliant program, a hard 'newline' character is placed in
the imported notes thus interfering with any paragraph layout that I
might have used.

Consider For example, the following memo:
<---------
Gravestone of William Thompson and Margaret is near front entrance to
St. Andrews Church, Bishop Auckland.<NL>
<NL>
Aged 68 when she died.<NL>
<NL>
<NL>

From Death Certificate:<NL
Death witnessed by John Thirkell who lived at 96 Newgate

Street<NL>
<--------
Note: In the example above <NL> indicates a newline character in the
note



This memo is exported as:
<----------
1 NOTE Gravestone of William Thompson and Margaret is near front
2 CONT entrance to St. Andrews Church, Bishop Auckland.
2 CONT
2 CONT Aged 68 when she died.
2 CONT
2 CONT
2 CONT From Death Certificate:
2 CONT Death witnessed by John Thirkell who lived at 96 Newgate
2 CONT Street
<----------
which in turn should be imported by a GEDCOM compliant program as

<----------
Gravestone of William Thompson and Margaret is near front<NL>
entrance to St. Andrews Church, Bishop Auckland.<NL>
<NL>
Aged 68 when she died.<NL>
<NL>
<NL>

From Death Certificate:<NL
Death witnessed by John Thirkell who lived at 96 Newgate<NL

Street<NL>
<-----------

which is not the same as the original note.

Interestingly, TMG imports this gedcom as:
<---------
Gravestone of William Thompson and Margaret is near front entrance to
St. Andrews Church, Bishop Auckland.<NL>
Aged 68 when she died. <NL>
<NL>

From Death Certificate: Death witnessed by John Thirkell who lived at 96
Newgate Street<NL

<---------

which is not correct in either sense (ie the same as the original or as
the GedCom standard says it should.)

From my reading of the standard, which I have done quite carefully since
I am using it to write my own programs, a correct form of the notes

record in the GEDCOM file would be:
<----------
1 NOTE Gravestone of William Thompson and Margaret is near fro
2 CONC nt entrance to St. Andrews Church, Bishop Auckland.
2 CONT
2 CONT Aged 68 when she died.
2 CONT
2 CONT
2 CONT From Death Certificate:
2 CONT Death witnessed by John Thirkell who lived at 96 New
2 CONC gate Street
<----------

Note the use of the CONC tag to continue a paragraph and the splitting
of the word between the CONC line and the previous line.

This is definitely something that I would like to see fixed in future
versions.

<snipped e-mailaddress>
______________________________
------------------------------

[Robert Heiling]

wim prange wrote:

"Robert Heiling" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

I've been repairing the damage that your Outlook Express has been doing to the
quoted portions of posts, but will leave this following as-is. Please consider
downloading & installing QuoteFix: which is shareware and corrects this problem
with OE.
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/

snip
That's strange. Just for giggles, I imported that TMG gedcom into FTM &
PAF
just now and didn't have to set anything special at all! I only told them
to
import the gedcom. Those notes look just fine in both of them. So the
score now
is TMG, FTM, & PAF have it right. GENBOX has it wrong.

And did the rest of the notes come through like you entered them in TMG as
well?

Not exactly. The notes for the one that I gave you the Gedcom section for are
fine. For others, some changes have been made per below.

Just for giggles, I imported my TMG-generated gedcom file into Legacy and
guess what ... My notes were changed into modern poetry: sentences were
truncated at strange places. I'm not a poet and it wasn't the way I had
entered my memo in TMG. Legacy's fault? No. I had to set some rewrapping
option and that particular memo did get through okay. Ofcourse there was now
a problem somewhere else. Memo's containing a couple of paragraphs were
changed to a single paragraph.

LEGACY on my system is set up with the standard defaults that it had when I
downloaded it. It it and the others, spaces had been stripped from the beginning
of lines. e.g.
Testing
had become
Testing
plus some other anomalies that would take more analysis to figure out just
exactly what is happening.

Just for 'giggles' (allthough feeling sorry for the TMG-users should be more
appropiate), I've searched TMG's mailinglist on Rootsweb. Apparantly the
problem was already reported at least twice. See messages below. Also, take
a look at the dates: 18 Dec 1999 - apparantly no reply because the original
poster posted the same message again on 13 Mar 2000 - and 12 Jul 2000.

That report was for several version releases ago, and like the bugs I've
reported on this thread, has still not been fixed. TMG is buggy software as I've
previously said. That still doesn't change the fact that PAF, LEGACY, & FTM
dealt with the situation in a more satisfactory fashion than GENBOX did.

Bob

<snip>

[Bob Velke]

wm said:

And I'm replying that your problem is caused by TMG-export plus that you
hadn't ticked "retain hard lines". I suggest you or other TMG-users report
this to Bob.

Bob is reading, as always, but as Bob Heiling has said twice, his problem
relates to how the proper use of the CONT tag is being interpreted on
import. You changed the subject to if and when TMG uses the CONC tag which
is an unrelated subject.

Bob Velke
Wholly Genes Software

[wim prange]

Bob,

I've also explained to Bob Heiling twice that his "proper use of the
CONT"-tag is caused by the *improper* use of the very same CONT-tag by TMG
in cases where it should have used CONC. That is by no means changing to an
"unrelated" subject, it's putting the subject in its wider context.

You know probably better than me that CONC and CONT-tags aren't always used
properly in Notes. That's why, probably all, genealogyprograms have an
option on gedcom-import to tackle this problem with Notes. Some have chosen
to set the default to CONT=CONT, that's their prerogative. Some have chosen
to set the default to CONT=CONC, that's their prerogative (the developer
probably expects that most of it's users will provide a gedcom with improper
used CONT-tags). Does the user want it reversed from the default? Change the
setting and the program will import it accordingly. It doesn;t fix the
problem for users with improper constructed notes but they can at least
choose what suits them best.

Until now, I've only seen one program that doesn't export it's notes
properly for that matter: it's TMG. So anytime a TMG-user is complaining
about the fact that his or her notes didn't import correctly and blaming the
receiving software for that, there is only one reply possible: "Get your
notes straight darling". Knowing what the root of the problem is and still
implying the receiving software is to blame, is plainly cheap.

I understand why you don't want me to put the subject in a broader context,
it sheds a rather nasty light on TMG.

Gr. Wim


"Bob Velke" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

wm said:

And I'm replying that your problem is caused by TMG-export plus that you
hadn't ticked "retain hard lines". I suggest you or other TMG-users
report
this to Bob.

Bob is reading, as always, but as Bob Heiling has said twice, his problem
relates to how the proper use of the CONT tag is being interpreted on
import. You changed the subject to if and when TMG uses the CONC tag
which
is an unrelated subject.

Bob Velke
Wholly Genes Software

[wim prange]

Bob Heiling wrote

<snip>

That report was for several version releases ago, and like the bugs I've
reported on this thread, has still not been fixed. TMG is buggy software
as I've
previously said. That still doesn't change the fact that PAF, LEGACY, &
FTM
dealt with the situation in a more satisfactory fashion than GENBOX did.

Read my reply to Bob Velke, no need for me to repeat that here.

Best of luck,

Wim

[Robert Heiling]

wim prange wrote:

Bob,

I've also explained to Bob Heiling twice that his "proper use of the
CONT"-tag is caused by the *improper* use of the very same CONT-tag by TMG
in cases where it should have used CONC. That is by no means changing to an
"unrelated" subject, it's putting the subject in its wider context.

Kindly note that I've corrected the subject header to what it should have been
initially and that also points to the *intended focus* of this thread. This
whole sub-thread of the original thread has been about my own testdrive of
*Genbox* and the sundry problems I observed. I could have chosen any old Gedcom
for the test and kindly forget where it came from as it doesn't matter. It
contains this portion:

1 NAME Effie Julia /Jones/
2 GIVN Effie Julia
2 SURN Jones
2 NOTE Death Certificate #123, Los Angeles County, CA
3 CONT
3 CONT Jones, Effie C.
3 CONT Female/White/Divorced
3 CONT Spouse: Jason S. Jones
3 CONT AGE 70 years-5 mths-2 days
etc

That formatting is exactly as I have it in several programs and exactly as I
want it! Any program that treats the CONT tag per the spec will import that &
display it as I wish. Genbox does not!!! It treats the CONT as though it were a
CONC. What is it that you don't understand about that? It's Gedcom 5.5!
http://www.vjet.demon.co.uk/ftree/gedco ... dix_a.html

<SNIP>

Bob

[singhals]

Mornin' Wim.

I agree that CONT and CONC aren't always used properly. That, however,
is rarely if ever the fault of the data-entry human -- I've never known
anyone to include that tag in their notes. What shows up as a GED-tag
of CONT or CONC depends on the export routine. What happens with them
depends on the import routine.

Thing is, if one has tabular material in one's NOTES, one probably
doesn't want the tabs removed and the lines run together as a sentence,
which is what CONC will do to 'em. On the issue of whether one ought
have such material in there, surely that's a situational/personal
decision? And if one decides to include them, other programs ought
leave 'em alone.

Is there a tag for TABLE? (g)

Cheryl



wim prange wrote:

Bob,

I've also explained to Bob Heiling twice that his "proper use of the
CONT"-tag is caused by the *improper* use of the very same CONT-tag by TMG
in cases where it should have used CONC. That is by no means changing to an
"unrelated" subject, it's putting the subject in its wider context.

You know probably better than me that CONC and CONT-tags aren't always used
properly in Notes. That's why, probably all, genealogyprograms have an
option on gedcom-import to tackle this problem with Notes. Some have chosen
to set the default to CONT=CONT, that's their prerogative. Some have chosen
to set the default to CONT=CONC, that's their prerogative (the developer
probably expects that most of it's users will provide a gedcom with improper
used CONT-tags). Does the user want it reversed from the default? Change the
setting and the program will import it accordingly. It doesn;t fix the
problem for users with improper constructed notes but they can at least
choose what suits them best.

Until now, I've only seen one program that doesn't export it's notes
properly for that matter: it's TMG. So anytime a TMG-user is complaining
about the fact that his or her notes didn't import correctly and blaming the
receiving software for that, there is only one reply possible: "Get your
notes straight darling". Knowing what the root of the problem is and still
implying the receiving software is to blame, is plainly cheap.

I understand why you don't want me to put the subject in a broader context,
it sheds a rather nasty light on TMG.

Gr. Wim


"Bob Velke" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

wm said:


And I'm replying that your problem is caused by TMG-export plus that you
hadn't ticked "retain hard lines". I suggest you or other TMG-users

report

this to Bob.

Bob is reading, as always, but as Bob Heiling has said twice, his problem
relates to how the proper use of the CONT tag is being interpreted on
import. You changed the subject to if and when TMG uses the CONC tag

which

is an unrelated subject.

Bob Velke
Wholly Genes Software

[Bob Velke]

wim said:

I've also explained to Bob Heiling twice that his "proper use of the
CONT"-tag is caused by the *improper* use of the very same CONT-tag by TMG
in cases where it should have used CONC.

As you show no interest in learning the facts, I will merely point out the
absurdity of defending the misinterpretation of a legal and appropriate
GEDCOM structure on the grounds that it would mean something else if only
it were different.

Until now, I've only seen one program that doesn't export it's notes
properly for that matter: it's TMG.

I can't speak to what you have and haven't seen but, like many aspects of
GEDCOM, there is a lot of debate among developers about if and how to apply
the CONC tag and, until recently, the programs with the largest market
share did not apply it in the same way. FTW changed the way that it
interprets CONC as of its last release and TMG will follow suit in its next.

The GEDCOM specs say that "Values that are split for a CONC tag must always
be split at a non-space." I know of only one program which uses CONC yet
violates the rule for how to use it (a truly unique permutation): and
that's your current program of choice.

I understand why you don't want me to put the subject in a broader context,
it sheds a rather nasty light on TMG.

If you say so. I trust that readers will consider the source(s).

Bob Velke
Wholly Genes Software
http://www.WhollyGenes.com

[wim prange]

Bob said

I can't speak to what you have and haven't seen but, like many aspects of
GEDCOM, there is a lot of debate among developers about if and how to
apply
the CONC tag and, until recently, the programs with the largest market
share did not apply it in the same way. FTW changed the way that it
interprets CONC as of its last release and TMG will follow suit in its
next.

I'm very well aware of the debate around the CONC/space issue and it's
different interpretations of these specs. I'll take your word for it that my
"current program of choice" uses a "truly unique permutation".
Facts are: it is using the CONC-tag at least, which gives other developers
the chance to work with it. You're giving them nothing at all. In hindsight,
it might have been a rather clever move of Bill in that debate. It seems the
developers are finally getting their act together concerning this issue. It
was about time, don't you think?

On behalf of TMG-users, how should I interpret your "TMG will follow suit in
next" remark? Will TMG export their notes using CONC and CONT in the next
release?

Wim

[Gjest]

who owned the patent prior to expiry....?


On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 19:04:53 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] (Bob
Velke) wrote:

Hugh said:

I have no inside information but I doubt that any of the
programmers/owners (maybe except Bob Velke) have chateaus on the
Riviera.

Oh, sure.

This sounds like I'm taking their side - but I'm really just talking
to myself trying to understand why they don't do as you say.

Since you asked <g>... although the GIF patent expired in the U.S. last
year, it didn't expire in other countries in which TMG is sold until this
summer.

GIF support (and other forms of LZW compression) will be in the next
release of TMG.

Bob Velke
Wholly Genes Software
http://www.whollygenes.com

[wim prange]

Bob (Heiling),

Since you were keeping scores on note import. You are aware that by default,
TMG changes the CONT-tag in notes to CONC too? The notes from your
TMG-gedcom are imported into TMG in exactly the same fashion as Genbox,
including the "Testing" note.

Best of luck,

Wim

[wim prange]

Bob,

That formatting is exactly as I have it in several programs and exactly as
I
want it! Any program that treats the CONT tag per the spec will import
that &
display it as I wish. Genbox does not!!! It treats the CONT as though it
were a
CONC. What is it that you don't understand about that? It's Gedcom 5.5!
http://www.vjet.demon.co.uk/ftree/gedco ... dix_a.html

SNIP
My previous reply was ofcourse in reply to this remark. I'll repeat it here:

Since you were keeping scores on note import. You are aware that by default,
TMG changes the CONT-tag in notes to CONC too? The notes from your
TMG-gedcom are imported into TMG in exactly the same fashion as Genbox,
including the "Testing" note.

Gr. Wim

[Dave Hinz]

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:19:39 +0100, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

who owned the patent prior to expiry....?

Google for "LZW" and "patent". Ziff-Davis, I believe. Big hairy legal
mess of questionable merit in the first place, but avoided easily enough
by using other formats.

Dave Hinz

[Robert Heiling]

wim prange wrote:

Bob (Heiling),

Since you were keeping scores on note import. You are aware that by default,
TMG changes the CONT-tag in notes to CONC too? The notes from your
TMG-gedcom are imported into TMG in exactly the same fashion as Genbox,
including the "Testing" note.

Best of luck,

Wim

How many times are you going to say that? I read the same in your other post.

Bob

[Robert Heiling]

wim prange wrote:

Bob,

Wim

I pointed you to QuoteFix to stop the garbage formatting that Outlook Express
causes. "You can lead a horse to water . . . ".

That formatting is exactly as I have it in several programs and exactly as
I
want it! Any program that treats the CONT tag per the spec will import
that &
display it as I wish. Genbox does not!!! It treats the CONT as though it
were a
CONC. What is it that you don't understand about that? It's Gedcom 5.5!
http://www.vjet.demon.co.uk/ftree/gedco ... dix_a.html

SNIP
My previous reply was ofcourse in reply to this remark. I'll repeat it here:

Since you were keeping scores on note import. You are aware that by default,
TMG changes the CONT-tag in notes to CONC too? The notes from your
TMG-gedcom are imported into TMG in exactly the same fashion as Genbox,
including the "Testing" note.

No score-keeping being done here! Look in the mirror for that! In the current
context, I couldn't care less what TMG does. The evaluation being made is of
GENBOX.

Start a different thread if you want to complain about TMG. I'll probably join
you.

Bob

[wim prange]

Hi Cheryl

We weren't discussing tabular data in notes but paragraphs. TMG doesn't use
CONC and CONT in notes but only CONT when exported via Gedcom. When this
gedcom is imported into probably most programs (also TMG), you have a choice
how to deal with these CONT-labels. For example, in TMG (I assume that's
your program of choice), the option is worded as "Extract carriage returns"
in the Advanced section of the Import routine. When this option is selected
(in TMG, default= selected), TMG will interpret the CONT as CONC and as a
result an entire note will become one single paragraph (for instance the
list Bob Heiling was talking about, but also notes which have several
paragraphs). The user will have to revise all his notes and put the carriage
returns back in the notes were necessary. That's a tedious job ofcourse.
When you choose to deselect that very same option, Bob Heilings list will
come out okay. But I'm afraid Bob's listnote is not exemplary for how most
users have written their notes. Mostly they will be several sentences long.
Through the export/import-routine, these sentences will have got carriage
return at 'strange' places. The user will have to revise all his notes and
delete the extraneous carriage returns were necessary. That's a tedious job
as well.

Just create a simple testfile with a couple of notes and see for yourself
how TMG handles this. You don't even need other software, import it back
into TMG itself a couple of times (using different options). Then you make
up your mind.

Best of luck,

Wim


, notes in TMG are either changed into one large single paragraph
"singhals" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

Mornin' Wim.

I agree that CONT and CONC aren't always used properly. That, however,
is rarely if ever the fault of the data-entry human -- I've never known
anyone to include that tag in their notes. What shows up as a GED-tag
of CONT or CONC depends on the export routine. What happens with them
depends on the import routine.

Thing is, if one has tabular material in one's NOTES, one probably
doesn't want the tabs removed and the lines run together as a sentence,
which is what CONC will do to 'em. On the issue of whether one ought
have such material in there, surely that's a situational/personal
decision? And if one decides to include them, other programs ought
leave 'em alone.

Is there a tag for TABLE? (g)

Cheryl



wim prange wrote:
Bob,

I've also explained to Bob Heiling twice that his "proper use of the
CONT"-tag is caused by the *improper* use of the very same CONT-tag by
TMG
in cases where it should have used CONC. That is by no means changing to
an
"unrelated" subject, it's putting the subject in its wider context.

You know probably better than me that CONC and CONT-tags aren't always
used
properly in Notes. That's why, probably all, genealogyprograms have an
option on gedcom-import to tackle this problem with Notes. Some have
chosen
to set the default to CONT=CONT, that's their prerogative. Some have
chosen
to set the default to CONT=CONC, that's their prerogative (the developer
probably expects that most of it's users will provide a gedcom with
improper
used CONT-tags). Does the user want it reversed from the default? Change
the
setting and the program will import it accordingly. It doesn;t fix the
problem for users with improper constructed notes but they can at least
choose what suits them best.

Until now, I've only seen one program that doesn't export it's notes
properly for that matter: it's TMG. So anytime a TMG-user is complaining
about the fact that his or her notes didn't import correctly and blaming
the
receiving software for that, there is only one reply possible: "Get your
notes straight darling". Knowing what the root of the problem is and
still
implying the receiving software is to blame, is plainly cheap.

I understand why you don't want me to put the subject in a broader
context,
it sheds a rather nasty light on TMG.

Gr. Wim


"Bob Velke" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]...

wm said:


And I'm replying that your problem is caused by TMG-export plus that
you
hadn't ticked "retain hard lines". I suggest you or other TMG-users

report

this to Bob.

Bob is reading, as always, but as Bob Heiling has said twice, his
problem
relates to how the proper use of the CONT tag is being interpreted on
import. You changed the subject to if and when TMG uses the CONC tag

which

is an unrelated subject.

Bob Velke
Wholly Genes Software

[Sherry]

[email protected] wrote in
news:1098886775.Kv/O9hq5Rf6JdCvUT/BX+g@teranews:

who owned the patent prior to expiry....?

Unisys
http://www.unisys.com/about__unisys/lzw

Sherry

[Everett M. Greene]

[email protected] (Bob Velke) writes:

I can't speak to what you have and haven't seen but, like many aspects of
GEDCOM, there is a lot of debate among developers about if and how to apply
the CONC tag and, until recently, the programs with the largest market
share did not apply it in the same way. FTW changed the way that it
interprets CONC as of its last release and TMG will follow suit in its next.

The GEDCOM specs say that "Values that are split for a CONC tag must always
be split at a non-space."

I haven't been following this "debate" nor have I looked at
the Gedcom spec for years, but I've always wondered why there's
a CONC tag at all. How is a genealogy program to automatically
determine the user's intent when deciding whether to use CONC
or CONT for output?

There's an argument that notes can be made to look prettier if
CONC is used but regardless of how pretty the notes look, the
content will (should?) be the same. Are we interested in the
form or the substance of the information?

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On 27 Oct 2004 17:47:15 GMT, Sherry <[email protected]> wrote:

[email protected] wrote in
news:1098886775.Kv/O9hq5Rf6JdCvUT/BX+g@teranews:

who owned the patent prior to expiry....?

Unisys
http://www.unisys.com/about__unisys/lzw

Sherry

Legacy needs to add one function...

When one decides to exit the program there are two choices - backup
and skip. There needs to be a [cancel] option in case one exited
accidently or changed the mind.

I post here because there have been no recent user group e-mails.

Hugh

Hugh

[Sherry]

[email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote in
news:[email protected]:
<snip>

Legacy needs to add one function...

When one decides to exit the program there are two choices - backup
and skip. There needs to be a [cancel] option in case one exited
accidently or changed the mind.

I post here because there have been no recent user group e-mails.

Hugh

I shall pass it on.

Sherry

[Robert Heiling]

Sherry wrote:

snip

I shall pass it on.

Sherry

How long has Legacy had GIF support? I see that it was only $5 to add it
to a copy of Legacy and I assume that means that Millenia had already
paid the $2500 registration fee up front. Is that correct?

Bob

[Sherry]

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

Sherry

How long has Legacy had GIF support? I see that it was only $5 to
add it to a copy of Legacy and I assume that means that Millenia had
already paid the $2500 registration fee up front. Is that correct?

Bob

Don't know those particulars, Bob, but I do know that we charged the $5
to keep the cost down for the users who didn't need gif support.

We included it as part of the program not long after the patent
expired.

Sherry

[Robert Heiling]

Sherry wrote:

Robert Heiling <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

Sherry

How long has Legacy had GIF support? I see that it was only $5 to
add it to a copy of Legacy and I assume that means that Millenia had
already paid the $2500 registration fee up front. Is that correct?

Bob

Don't know those particulars, Bob, but I do know that we charged the $5
to keep the cost down for the users who didn't need gif support.

That was certainly fair.

We included it as part of the program not long after the patent
expired.

It had to be before Dec 2003 because that note was in the copy of version
5.0 that I downloaded at the time. It was probably after just the US patent
expired. Here's that info:
"Unisys U.S. LZW Patent No. 4,558,302 expired on June 20, 2003, the
counterpart patents in the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy
expired on June 18, 2004, the Japanese counterpart patents expired on June
20, 2004 and the counterpart Canadian patent expired on July 7, 2004."

Bob