Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [AQ_NFS] newFamilySearch to Family Tree

Expand Messages
  • Stewart Millar
    Gaylon, Having watched most of the video broadcasts from RootsTech - whilst all were interesting and absorbing, presenting a futuristic view of technical help
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 28 6:26 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Gaylon,

      Having watched most of the video broadcasts from RootsTech - whilst all
      were interesting and absorbing, presenting a futuristic view of technical
      help for the genealogist, I believe that the only presentation that covered
      the nFS replacement was the appropriately titled session "Future of
      FamilySearch Family Tree" by Ron Tanner which uniquely amongst the videoed
      sessions is still reported on the RootsTech site as . . . "will be posted
      at a later date" . . . very strange . . . . I am glad I was able to watch
      it before it was taken off the site.

      With regard to your point referring to possible lost valuable information
      by adopting the nFS Summary data - the points made in the presentation (as
      far as my memory recall!) were that (a) the incorporation of AF and PRF in
      nFS was a mistake; (b) the AF and PRF data would now be taken out of nFS
      and included with a new user contribution category of "contributed family
      trees" - which will continue to be searchable via familysearch.org as part
      of the research process - so that data (better data or bad data) would not
      be lost. What I cannot recall being covered was the data from duplicated
      temple submissions that may have been made; (c) any data added or changed
      on FS FT should be supported using the new features for attaching source
      documentation and statements of justification and conclusions - try to
      swamp any other contributor who may be tempted to add non-sourced or
      non-justified data; (d) whilst not in their plans at the moment for FS FT,
      Ron stated he was looking at an improved notification system other than the
      "Watch" feature (that is currently in FS FT), namely that if any other
      contributor changes any data I have submitted, I would be notified
      automatically; (e) a surprising announcement that FS FT would replace nFS
      before the end of this year . . . and be open to the general public.

      I can imagine some big changes need to the AQ interface for FS FT - I
      certainly hope that you are being appropriately kept informed by
      FamilySearch.

      ===Stewart


      On 27 April 2012 17:03, Gaylon Findlay <gfindlay@...> wrote:

      > **
      >
      >
      > Stewart:
      >
      > Thank you for mentioning the recorded sessions of RootsTech. For others,
      > this is the launch page to see those sessions:
      >
      > http://rootstech.org/#video-player
      >
      > As you stated in your 4th bullet item, I have understood that a
      > FamilySearch representative essentially said that for any given person in
      > the nFS database, the summary values would be preserved in Family Tree, but
      > that other values would be discarded. For example, if nFS shows three opin
      > ions for a person's birth as being:
      >
      > 12 June 1850 in Salt Lake City (Summary)
      > 12 June 1850 in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake, Utah
      > 15 May 1850 in Boston, Massachusetts
      >
      > then only the first of the above entries will survive, because it is the
      > Summary value. If the person happened to be born in Massachusetts, and the
      > other two entries were erroneous, then we will lose valuable information
      > when nFS goes away. I wonder if someone who attended RootsTech, or watched
      > the videos, can tell me which of the lectures covered such a discussion?
      >
      > Thanks,
      >
      > Gaylon
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Ken Doyle
      Hi Stewart, http://www.rootstech.org/videos#video-player The video is available now. I am currently watching it. Cheers, Ken
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 7, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Stewart,

        http://www.rootstech.org/videos#video-player

        The video is available now. I am currently watching it.

        Cheers,

        Ken

        --- In AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com, Stewart Millar <stew999@...> wrote:
        >
        > Gaylon,
        >
        > Having watched most of the video broadcasts from RootsTech - whilst all
        > were interesting and absorbing, presenting a futuristic view of technical
        > help for the genealogist, I believe that the only presentation that covered
        > the nFS replacement was the appropriately titled session "Future of
        > FamilySearch Family Tree" by Ron Tanner which uniquely amongst the videoed
        > sessions is still reported on the RootsTech site as . . . "will be posted
        > at a later date" . . . very strange . . . . I am glad I was able to watch
        > it before it was taken off the site.
        >
        > With regard to your point referring to possible lost valuable information
        > by adopting the nFS Summary data - the points made in the presentation (as
        > far as my memory recall!) were that (a) the incorporation of AF and PRF in
        > nFS was a mistake; (b) the AF and PRF data would now be taken out of nFS
        > and included with a new user contribution category of "contributed family
        > trees" - which will continue to be searchable via familysearch.org as part
        > of the research process - so that data (better data or bad data) would not
        > be lost. What I cannot recall being covered was the data from duplicated
        > temple submissions that may have been made; (c) any data added or changed
        > on FS FT should be supported using the new features for attaching source
        > documentation and statements of justification and conclusions - try to
        > swamp any other contributor who may be tempted to add non-sourced or
        > non-justified data; (d) whilst not in their plans at the moment for FS FT,
        > Ron stated he was looking at an improved notification system other than the
        > "Watch" feature (that is currently in FS FT), namely that if any other
        > contributor changes any data I have submitted, I would be notified
        > automatically; (e) a surprising announcement that FS FT would replace nFS
        > before the end of this year . . . and be open to the general public.
        >
        > I can imagine some big changes need to the AQ interface for FS FT - I
        > certainly hope that you are being appropriately kept informed by
        > FamilySearch.
        >
        > ===Stewart
        >
        >
        > On 27 April 2012 17:03, Gaylon Findlay <gfindlay@...> wrote:
        >
        > > **
        > >
        > >
        > > Stewart:
        > >
        > > Thank you for mentioning the recorded sessions of RootsTech. For others,
        > > this is the launch page to see those sessions:
        > >
        > > http://rootstech.org/#video-player
        > >
        > > As you stated in your 4th bullet item, I have understood that a
        > > FamilySearch representative essentially said that for any given person in
        > > the nFS database, the summary values would be preserved in Family Tree, but
        > > that other values would be discarded. For example, if nFS shows three opin
        > > ions for a person's birth as being:
        > >
        > > 12 June 1850 in Salt Lake City (Summary)
        > > 12 June 1850 in Salt Lake City, Salt Lake, Utah
        > > 15 May 1850 in Boston, Massachusetts
        > >
        > > then only the first of the above entries will survive, because it is the
        > > Summary value. If the person happened to be born in Massachusetts, and the
        > > other two entries were erroneous, then we will lose valuable information
        > > when nFS goes away. I wonder if someone who attended RootsTech, or watched
        > > the videos, can tell me which of the lectures covered such a discussion?
        > >
        > > Thanks,
        > >
        > > Gaylon
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.