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

Re: Updating the Members Guide plus the T&FHW course

Expand Messages
  • Rebecca Read
    This discussion seems to be as much about the Temple and Family History Work course as it is about updating the Member s Guide. Hence my change of title.
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 6, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      This discussion seems to be as much about the Temple and Family History Work course as it is about updating the Member's Guide. Hence my change of title. Here's my two cents worth:


      I agree that nFS does not contain sufficient space to put all the information from the cardboard box, but I disagree most vehemently that FS Family Tree has the same deficiency. Page 53 of the Family Tree Users Guide says "An individual can have up to 1,000 sources attached to him or her", and although "you cannot currently upload an image from your computer for use as a source ... you can upload the image to a photo sharing site and link to it there". If the source is available online, you can enter the URL - it's as easy as finding the record online and copying and pasting the address into the URL field in the source field provided (see p.58). I think this is brilliant! I'm busy uploading to photoloom.com all my scanned images, not just photos, but vital records, immigration records, wills etc.
      The source fields in FS Family Tree provide examples of how to describe and cite sources. What more could we want?
      I don't think the Member's Guide was ever intended to be more than a guide. Surely that's why "Additional Resources" are suggested at the end of each chapter. The suggested resources include "How Do I Start My Family History" (p.12) and "Preparing a Family History for Publicaton" (p.20) and "A Guide to Research" (p.28). These resources provide clear instructions on the principles of the "Research Process". Why duplicate that in the Member's Guide? Furthermore, consultants can cover topics like this in classes we offer at our FHCs, or in additional RS meetings, etc.
      As for the Instructor's Guide, once again I don't think it was meant to be more than a guide. In the Introduction, it says that it is a "beginning level course", it "contains basic lessons" and it lists "the primary resources for this course" as being the Member's Guide, the Instructor's Guide and the course DVD. It also says that "these lessons should be adapted to the needs of class members". It says that if the participants, for example, "are comfortable using computers, you may not need to teach the section on how to record information on paper forms" (see p.vi). As far as I'm concerned, if you find it necessary to teach the "research process" then there's no reason why you can't. Go ahead and create a diagram, as you see fit, and provide it as a supplementary handout.
      We're also not limited to teaching the course during Sunday School time (see p.v). Last year, with the approval of the stake presidency, I started conducting a Temple and Family History Work class on a weekday evening, in order to cater for members who cannot attend a class during Sunday School time, such as Primary and Sunday School faculty and people with stake callings. The number of participants is always limited to the number of computers (four) in our center. Members can come from any ward in the stake. We are receiving requests from people who could attend the class during Sunday School, but would prefer to attend on a weeknight for one reason or another.

      Because the class is not held during Sunday School time, we can have two-hour sessions and we can cover the lesson material in five lessons/workshops over five weeks, or we can extend it for an extra week or two as the participants require. After doing it this way, I would definitely not like to trade places with anyone conducting the course during Sunday School time. I have one or two consultants with me at each class, enabling plenty of one-on-one help for the class members, and I find there is always time to answer questions. One consultant, a professional historian, has a simple and efficient system for organising or filing certficates and other documents. I always have her demonstrate and explain how it works following the lesson on "Gathering Information from Public Records", and most class members find it easy to understand and are eager to begin.

      I always provide a handout explaining the difference between FS.org and nFS.org. and I take the time to give a brief guided tour around each site. I agree that the DVD confuses the two sites, but they will soon be combined anyway, so I explain that. I particularly dislike how the DVD shows the old FS.org site, though, rather than the current one. I get the impression that old footage was used in the making of some segments and I think that was a mistake.
      If you notice that something is missing from the wiki, compose something to contribute. That's how a wiki works.

      Overall, I think the Church's Family History Department is doing an excellent job. It is spoiling us with resources. At the same time, it is leaving room for us to use our initiative, be wise stewards and not be commanded in all things.

      Rebecca Read.




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • tmason1
      Rebecca, You sound like my kind of teacher. Thank you very much for your comments and success story. I will disagree with you on one point however. The Family
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 7, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Rebecca,

        You sound like my kind of teacher. Thank you very much for your comments and success story.

        I will disagree with you on one point however.

        The Family Search Family Tree program does NOT (1) allow for the REPEATED use of the same source title (such as the 1900 U.S. census); nor (2) does it provide a place for the Citation Detail source reference.

        Therefore, you have to repeat the complete source title and citation detail reference with each of the 1,000 sources for each individual and when you multiply this by 50,000 names for which you have some source information, AS IT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED - the list of sources at the bottom of the tree will contain a reference list of 1,000 multiplied by 50,000. That will make the list useless.

        Terry Mason
        Clermont FL

        --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Read <rebecca-read@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > This discussion seems to be as much about the Temple and Family History Work course as it is about updating the Member's Guide. Hence my change of title. Here's my two cents worth:
        >
        >
        > I agree that nFS does not contain sufficient space to put all the information from the cardboard box, but I disagree most vehemently that FS Family Tree has the same deficiency. Page 53 of the Family Tree Users Guide says "An individual can have up to 1,000 sources attached to him or her", and although "you cannot currently upload an image from your computer for use as a source ... you can upload the image to a photo sharing site and link to it there". If the source is available online, you can enter the URL - it's as easy as finding the record online and copying and pasting the address into the URL field in the source field provided (see p.58). I think this is brilliant! I'm busy uploading to photoloom.com all my scanned images, not just photos, but vital records, immigration records, wills etc.
        > The source fields in FS Family Tree provide examples of how to describe and cite sources. What more could we want?
        > I don't think the Member's Guide was ever intended to be more than a guide. Surely that's why "Additional Resources" are suggested at the end of each chapter. The suggested resources include "How Do I Start My Family History" (p.12) and "Preparing a Family History for Publicaton" (p.20) and "A Guide to Research" (p.28). These resources provide clear instructions on the principles of the "Research Process". Why duplicate that in the Member's Guide? Furthermore, consultants can cover topics like this in classes we offer at our FHCs, or in additional RS meetings, etc.
        > As for the Instructor's Guide, once again I don't think it was meant to be more than a guide. In the Introduction, it says that it is a "beginning level course", it "contains basic lessons" and it lists "the primary resources for this course" as being the Member's Guide, the Instructor's Guide and the course DVD. It also says that "these lessons should be adapted to the needs of class members". It says that if the participants, for example, "are comfortable using computers, you may not need to teach the section on how to record information on paper forms" (see p.vi). As far as I'm concerned, if you find it necessary to teach the "research process" then there's no reason why you can't. Go ahead and create a diagram, as you see fit, and provide it as a supplementary handout.
        > We're also not limited to teaching the course during Sunday School time (see p.v). Last year, with the approval of the stake presidency, I started conducting a Temple and Family History Work class on a weekday evening, in order to cater for members who cannot attend a class during Sunday School time, such as Primary and Sunday School faculty and people with stake callings. The number of participants is always limited to the number of computers (four) in our center. Members can come from any ward in the stake. We are receiving requests from people who could attend the class during Sunday School, but would prefer to attend on a weeknight for one reason or another.
        >
        > Because the class is not held during Sunday School time, we can have two-hour sessions and we can cover the lesson material in five lessons/workshops over five weeks, or we can extend it for an extra week or two as the participants require. After doing it this way, I would definitely not like to trade places with anyone conducting the course during Sunday School time. I have one or two consultants with me at each class, enabling plenty of one-on-one help for the class members, and I find there is always time to answer questions. One consultant, a professional historian, has a simple and efficient system for organising or filing certficates and other documents. I always have her demonstrate and explain how it works following the lesson on "Gathering Information from Public Records", and most class members find it easy to understand and are eager to begin.
        >
        > I always provide a handout explaining the difference between FS.org and nFS.org. and I take the time to give a brief guided tour around each site. I agree that the DVD confuses the two sites, but they will soon be combined anyway, so I explain that. I particularly dislike how the DVD shows the old FS.org site, though, rather than the current one. I get the impression that old footage was used in the making of some segments and I think that was a mistake.
        > If you notice that something is missing from the wiki, compose something to contribute. That's how a wiki works.
        >
        > Overall, I think the Church's Family History Department is doing an excellent job. It is spoiling us with resources. At the same time, it is leaving room for us to use our initiative, be wise stewards and not be commanded in all things.
        >
        > Rebecca Read.
      • Gtempleman1
        If there are problems with the source docommentation feature, at least illustrate it with reasonable examples. Just because software CAN handle 1000 sources
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 7, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          If there are problems with the source docommentation feature, at least illustrate it with reasonable examples. Just because software CAN handle 1000 sources per person does not mean it will ever need to. Do you have anyone in your database with 1000 sources?

          Then to take that number and project that EVERY person in the database would  be similarly sourced is ludicrous. Let's bring the discussion back to the difficulties that exist in reality, not fantasy land.


          Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S™ II Skyrocket™, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone.

          -------- Original message --------
          Subject: [FHCNET] Re: Updating the Members Guide plus the T&FHW course
          From: tmason1 <tmason1@...>
          To: FHCNET@yahoogroups.com
          CC:

          Rebecca,

          You sound like my kind of teacher. Thank you very much for your comments and success story.

          I will disagree with you on one point however.

          The Family Search Family Tree program does NOT (1) allow for the REPEATED use of the same source title (such as the 1900 U.S. census); nor (2) does it provide a place for the Citation Detail source reference.

          Therefore, you have to repeat the complete source title and citation detail reference with each of the 1,000 sources for each individual and when you multiply this by 50,000 names for which you have some source information, AS IT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED - the list of sources at the bottom of the tree will contain a reference list of 1,000 multiplied by 50,000. That will make the list useless.

          Terry Mason
          Clermont FL

          --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Read <rebecca-read@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > This discussion seems to be as much about the Temple and Family History Work course as it is about updating the Member's Guide. Hence my change of title. Here's my two cents worth:

          >
          > I agree that nFS does not contain sufficient space to put all the information from the cardboard box, but I disagree most vehemently that FS Family Tree has the same deficiency. Page 53 of the Family Tree Users Guide says "An individual can have up to 1,000 sources attached to him or her", and although "you cannot currently upload an image from your computer for use as a source ... you can upload the image to a photo sharing site and link to it there". If the source is available online, you can enter the URL - it's as easy as finding the record online and copying and pasting the address into the URL field in the source field provided (see p.58). I think this is brilliant! I'm busy uploading to photoloom.com all my scanned images, not just photos, but vital records, immigration records, wills etc.
          > The source fields in FS Family Tree provide examples of how to describe and cite sources. What more could we want?
          > I don't think the Member's Guide was ever intended to be more than a guide. Surely that's why "Additional Resources" are suggested at the end of each chapter. The suggested resources include "How Do I Start My Family History" (p.12) and "Preparing a Family History for Publicaton" (p.20) and "A Guide to Research" (p.28). These resources provide clear instructions on the principles of the "Research Process". Why duplicate that in the Member's Guide? Furthermore, consultants can cover topics like this in classes we offer at our FHCs, or in additional RS meetings, etc.
          > As for the Instructor's Guide, once again I don't think it was meant to be more than a guide. In the Introduction, it says that it is a "beginning level course", it "contains basic lessons" and it lists "the primary resources for this course" as being the Member's Guide, the Instructor's Guide and the course DVD. It also says that "these lessons should be adapted to the needs of class members". It says that if the participants, for example, "are comfortable using computers, you may not need to teach the section on how to record information on paper forms" (see p.vi). As far as I'm concerned, if you find it necessary to teach the "research process" then there's no reason why you can't. Go ahead and create a diagram, as you see fit, and provide it as a supplementary handout.
          > We're also not limited to teaching the course during Sunday School time (see p.v). Last year, with the approval of the stake presidency, I started conducting a Temple and Family History Work class on a weekday evening, in order to cater for members who cannot attend a class during Sunday School time, such as Primary and Sunday School faculty and people with stake callings. The number of participants is always limited to the number of computers (four) in our center. Members can come from any ward in the stake. We are receiving requests from people who could attend the class during Sunday School, but would prefer to attend on a weeknight for one reason or another.

          > Because the class is not held during Sunday School time, we can have two-hour sessions and we can cover the lesson material in five lessons/workshops over five weeks, or we can extend it for an extra week or two as the participants require. After doing it this way, I would definitely not like to trade places with anyone conducting the course during Sunday School time. I have one or two consultants with me at each class, enabling plenty of one-on-one help for the class members, and I find there is always time to answer questions. One consultant, a professional historian, has a simple and efficient system for organising or filing certficates and other documents. I always have her demonstrate and explain how it works following the lesson on "Gathering Information from Public Records", and most class members find it easy to understand and are eager to begin.

          > I always provide a handout explaining the difference between FS.org and nFS.org. and I take the time to give a brief guided tour around each site. I agree that the DVD confuses the two sites, but they will soon be combined anyway, so I explain that. I particularly dislike how the DVD shows the old FS.org site, though, rather than the current one. I get the impression that old footage was used in the making of some segments and I think that was a mistake.
          > If you notice that something is missing from the wiki, compose something to contribute. That's how a wiki works.

          > Overall, I think the Church's Family History Department is doing an excellent job. It is spoiling us with resources. At the same time, it is leaving room for us to use our initiative, be wise stewards and not be commanded in all things.
          >
          > Rebecca Read.




          ------------------------------------

          or send blank email to FHCNET-subscribe@yahoogroupsYahoo! Groups Links





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Venita Roylance
          Hi Terry, You can use the same source over and over, IF you are selective in how you create the source in the first place. The trick is to not personalize
          Message 4 of 8 , Apr 7, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Terry,

            You can use the same source over and over, IF you are selective in how you create the source in the first place. The trick is to not personalize the source when you create it. Put the title in the title field, i.e. "1860 United States Census;" and the location of the original record in the location field (named "Citation" on the template), i.e. "United States Census Bureau, Washington, D.C., United States." After you have attached that source to an individual, click it to open it. The bottom part of the small window that opens is currently labeled "Reason This Source is Attached." Click on the "Edit" or "Add" link there, and type in, or copy-paste, the pertinent information for that individual. You can also add the URL to an image of the document there, but it may not work by simply clicking on it. It may have to be pasted into the address field of a browser.

            In that same window you will see an area labeled "url." If you had attached a URL to your source when you created it, it would show up there - but that would make the source valid for only one individual (or family, in some situations). I'm campaigning (Feedback!) to have that "url" made active after the source has been attached, so we can then add a URL, making it apply to just that individual.

            If you want to see an example of how this works in Family Tree, you may visit my ancestor John Michie LZXT-C2P, and choose "View Ancestor." Click "Add a New Source" to see the list of sources that I have created so far. Feel free to snoop around� Some of the links are attached to John's children and John's ancestors. Click the "Open Details" link above a name to see the personal details I have added, particularly to birth and christening entries. FYI, I have not added any URLs because there are no links to images of these sources in FamilySearch.

            I'm feeling more positive about sourcing data in Family Tree. I think it will work.

            Venita

            PS: Please know that I am aware that my procedure is a bit of a departure from the directions in the guide. Since Family Tree is still officially in beta, I don't mind making alternate suggestions.

            Family History and Other Fascinations
            venitap.com


            On Apr 7, 2012, at 8:41 AM, tmason1 wrote:

            > Rebecca,
            >
            > You sound like my kind of teacher. Thank you very much for your comments and success story.
            >
            > I will disagree with you on one point however.
            >
            > The Family Search Family Tree program does NOT (1) allow for the REPEATED use of the same source title (such as the 1900 U.S. census); nor (2) does it provide a place for the Citation Detail source reference.
            >
            > Therefore, you have to repeat the complete source title and citation detail reference with each of the 1,000 sources for each individual and when you multiply this by 50,000 names for which you have some source information, AS IT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED - the list of sources at the bottom of the tree will contain a reference list of 1,000 multiplied by 50,000. That will make the list useless.
            >
            > Terry Mason
            > Clermont FL
            >
            > --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Read <rebecca-read@...> wrote:
            > >
            > >
            > > This discussion seems to be as much about the Temple and Family History Work course as it is about updating the Member's Guide. Hence my change of title. Here's my two cents worth:
            > >
            > >
            > > I agree that nFS does not contain sufficient space to put all the information from the cardboard box, but I disagree most vehemently that FS Family Tree has the same deficiency. Page 53 of the Family Tree Users Guide says "An individual can have up to 1,000 sources attached to him or her", and although "you cannot currently upload an image from your computer for use as a source ... you can upload the image to a photo sharing site and link to it there". If the source is available online, you can enter the URL - it's as easy as finding the record online and copying and pasting the address into the URL field in the source field provided (see p.58). I think this is brilliant! I'm busy uploading to photoloom.com all my scanned images, not just photos, but vital records, immigration records, wills etc.
            > > The source fields in FS Family Tree provide examples of how to describe and cite sources. What more could we want?
            > > I don't think the Member's Guide was ever intended to be more than a guide. Surely that's why "Additional Resources" are suggested at the end of each chapter. The suggested resources include "How Do I Start My Family History" (p.12) and "Preparing a Family History for Publicaton" (p.20) and "A Guide to Research" (p.28). These resources provide clear instructions on the principles of the "Research Process". Why duplicate that in the Member's Guide? Furthermore, consultants can cover topics like this in classes we offer at our FHCs, or in additional RS meetings, etc.
            > > As for the Instructor's Guide, once again I don't think it was meant to be more than a guide. In the Introduction, it says that it is a "beginning level course", it "contains basic lessons" and it lists "the primary resources for this course" as being the Member's Guide, the Instructor's Guide and the course DVD. It also says that "these lessons should be adapted to the needs of class members". It says that if the participants, for example, "are comfortable using computers, you may not need to teach the section on how to record information on paper forms" (see p.vi). As far as I'm concerned, if you find it necessary to teach the "research process" then there's no reason why you can't. Go ahead and create a diagram, as you see fit, and provide it as a supplementary handout.
            > > We're also not limited to teaching the course during Sunday School time (see p.v). Last year, with the approval of the stake presidency, I started conducting a Temple and Family History Work class on a weekday evening, in order to cater for members who cannot attend a class during Sunday School time, such as Primary and Sunday School faculty and people with stake callings. The number of participants is always limited to the number of computers (four) in our center. Members can come from any ward in the stake. We are receiving requests from people who could attend the class during Sunday School, but would prefer to attend on a weeknight for one reason or another.
            > >
            > > Because the class is not held during Sunday School time, we can have two-hour sessions and we can cover the lesson material in five lessons/workshops over five weeks, or we can extend it for an extra week or two as the participants require. After doing it this way, I would definitely not like to trade places with anyone conducting the course during Sunday School time. I have one or two consultants with me at each class, enabling plenty of one-on-one help for the class members, and I find there is always time to answer questions. One consultant, a professional historian, has a simple and efficient system for organising or filing certficates and other documents. I always have her demonstrate and explain how it works following the lesson on "Gathering Information from Public Records", and most class members find it easy to understand and are eager to begin.
            > >
            > > I always provide a handout explaining the difference between FS.org and nFS.org. and I take the time to give a brief guided tour around each site. I agree that the DVD confuses the two sites, but they will soon be combined anyway, so I explain that. I particularly dislike how the DVD shows the old FS.org site, though, rather than the current one. I get the impression that old footage was used in the making of some segments and I think that was a mistake.
            > > If you notice that something is missing from the wiki, compose something to contribute. That's how a wiki works.
            > >
            > > Overall, I think the Church's Family History Department is doing an excellent job. It is spoiling us with resources. At the same time, it is leaving room for us to use our initiative, be wise stewards and not be commanded in all things.
            > >
            > > Rebecca Read.
            >
            >



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • tmason1
            All right Gary, let s deal with reality. My wife has 12447 individuals with sources in her database. Is it reasonable to expect her to repeat her complete
            Message 5 of 8 , Apr 8, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              All right Gary, let's deal with reality.

              My wife has 12447 individuals with sources in her database. Is it reasonable to expect her to repeat her complete reference each time she enters an individual in the Family Tree? (She has faithfully entered her source title entries into new.FamilySearch and Ron Tanner has stated these entries will be ported over from nFS into FT.) She can NOT do a similar correct source documentation in the Family Tree program as it is currently displayed.

              I have used the ONE source title of "1930 U.S. Census" a total of 576 times in my database.

              I think that the way that Family Tree is currently designed, I would have to make 576 different entries in the Source field in Family Tree and they would each be listed - separately.

              In my personal software database, I have one entry of the source title labeled "1930 U.S. Census" with an author which I can repeatedly use.

              I have 576 individual Citation Detail references to this one census title for 576 families in my database. And I not only have 576 entries of where that source title is used, but I have 576 instances where I have personally extracted "Actual Text" entries for each family.

              Having the url is a nice idea for the new user, but shouldn't the Family Tree program make allowances for those of us who have been obedient to department guidelines that were introducted in the instructions for designing GEDCOM files and software a little over 30 years ago?

              I have 460 different source titles in my personal software database. The Family Tree template as currently designed will not accommodate my uploading all the individual citation detail and actual text entries attached to those 460 different source titles.

              Do we users have an opportunity for the engineers to study out the problems that their design will create? If the program is in the testing stage, then why can't they reach out to some of the potential users who have been involved in software design or have been faithful in following department instructions?

              The source title entry must be separated from the Citation Detail entries in the Family Tree for it to work. And each individual piece of data for each individual must allow for repeated use of a source title and an individual citation detail entry. This is currently not a feature of FamilySearch Family Tree.

              Right now, all I feel I'm able to do is to sound a warning and wait for the time in which I can begrudgingly say "I told you so."

              Do you have another 'educated' idea about how to cope with this problem - as it is now - other than wait until the product is released to the world and then sit back then and smugly say "it doesn't work"?

              Terry Mason
              Clermont FL

              --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Gtempleman1 <gtempleman1@...> wrote:
              >
              > If there are problems with the source docommentation feature, at least illustrate it with reasonable examples. Just because software CAN handle 1000 sources per person does not mean it will ever need to. Do you have anyone in your database with 1000 sources?
              >
              > Then to take that number and project that EVERY person in the database would be similarly sourced is ludicrous. Let's bring the discussion back to the difficulties that exist in reality, not fantasy land.
              >
              > -------- Original message --------
              > Subject: [FHCNET] Re: Updating the Members Guide plus the T&FHW course
              >
              > Rebecca,
              >
              > You sound like my kind of teacher. Thank you very much for your comments and success story.
              >
              > I will disagree with you on one point however.
              >
              > The Family Search Family Tree program does NOT (1) allow for the REPEATED use of the same source title (such as the 1900 U.S. census); nor (2) does it provide a place for the Citation Detail source reference.
              >
              > Therefore, you have to repeat the complete source title and citation detail reference with each of the 1,000 sources for each individual and when you multiply this by 50,000 names for which you have some source information, AS IT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED - the list of sources at the bottom of the tree will contain a reference list of 1,000 multiplied by 50,000. That will make the list useless.
              >
              > Terry Mason
              > Clermont FL
              >
              > --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Read <rebecca-read@> wrote:
              > >
              > > <snip>
              > > I agree that nFS does not contain sufficient space to put all the information from the cardboard box, but I disagree most vehemently that FS Family Tree has the same deficiency. Page 53 of the Family Tree Users Guide says "An individual can have up to 1,000 sources attached to him or her", and although "you cannot currently upload an image from your computer for use as a source ... you can upload the image to a photo sharing site and link to it there". If the source is available online, you can enter the URL - it's as easy as finding the record online and copying and pasting the address into the URL field in the source field provided (see p.58). I think this is brilliant! I'm busy uploading to photoloom.com all my scanned images, not just photos, but vital records, immigration records, wills etc.
              > > The source fields in FS Family Tree provide examples of how to describe and cite sources. What more could we want?
              > > <snip>
              > > Overall, I think the Church's Family History Department is doing an excellent job. It is spoiling us with resources. At the same time, it is leaving room for us to use our initiative, be wise stewards and not be commanded in all things.
              > >
              > > Rebecca Read.
            • Allan Hale
              Terry This is a great message. The first question is have you said this in Get Satisfaction on Family Tree. I started a thread when FT first came out that is
              Message 6 of 8 , Apr 8, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Terry

                This is a great message. The first question is have you said this in Get Satisfaction on Family Tree. I started a thread when FT first came out that is nearly the same. The problem is that it does not look like they want to change this format very much no matter what we say. Ron Tanner used to monitor this venue and would comment once in a while but I do know that he does monitor Get Satisfaction. Those of us who are squeaking here need to squawk louder over there before they will do anything.


                Allan Hale
                WWS Missionary




                >________________________________
                > From: tmason1 <tmason1@...>
                >To: FHCNET@yahoogroups.com
                >Sent: Sunday, April 8, 2012 4:28 PM
                >Subject: [FHCNET] Re: Updating the Members Guide plus the T&FHW course
                >
                >

                >All right Gary, let's deal with reality.
                >
                >My wife has 12447 individuals with sources in her database. Is it reasonable to expect her to repeat her complete reference each time she enters an individual in the Family Tree? (She has faithfully entered her source title entries into new.FamilySearch and Ron Tanner has stated these entries will be ported over from nFS into FT.) She can NOT do a similar correct source documentation in the Family Tree program as it is currently displayed.
                >
                >I have used the ONE source title of "1930 U.S. Census" a total of 576 times in my database.
                >
                >I think that the way that Family Tree is currently designed, I would have to make 576 different entries in the Source field in Family Tree and they would each be listed - separately.
                >
                >In my personal software database, I have one entry of the source title labeled "1930 U.S. Census" with an author which I can repeatedly use.
                >
                >I have 576 individual Citation Detail references to this one census title for 576 families in my database. And I not only have 576 entries of where that source title is used, but I have 576 instances where I have personally extracted "Actual Text" entries for each family.
                >
                >Having the url is a nice idea for the new user, but shouldn't the Family Tree program make allowances for those of us who have been obedient to department guidelines that were introducted in the instructions for designing GEDCOM files and software a little over 30 years ago?
                >
                >I have 460 different source titles in my personal software database. The Family Tree template as currently designed will not accommodate my uploading all the individual citation detail and actual text entries attached to those 460 different source titles.
                >
                >Do we users have an opportunity for the engineers to study out the problems that their design will create? If the program is in the testing stage, then why can't they reach out to some of the potential users who have been involved in software design or have been faithful in following department instructions?
                >
                >The source title entry must be separated from the Citation Detail entries in the Family Tree for it to work. And each individual piece of data for each individual must allow for repeated use of a source title and an individual citation detail entry. This is currently not a feature of FamilySearch Family Tree.
                >
                >Right now, all I feel I'm able to do is to sound a warning and wait for the time in which I can begrudgingly say "I told you so."
                >
                >Do you have another 'educated' idea about how to cope with this problem - as it is now - other than wait until the product is released to the world and then sit back then and smugly say "it doesn't work"?
                >
                >Terry Mason
                >Clermont FL
                >
                >--- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Gtempleman1 <gtempleman1@...> wrote:
                >>
                >> If there are problems with the source docommentation feature, at least illustrate it with reasonable examples. Just because software CAN handle 1000 sources per person does not mean it will ever need to. Do you have anyone in your database with 1000 sources?
                >>
                >> Then to take that number and project that EVERY person in the database would be similarly sourced is ludicrous. Let's bring the discussion back to the difficulties that exist in reality, not fantasy land.
                >>
                >> -------- Original message --------
                >> Subject: [FHCNET] Re: Updating the Members Guide plus the T&FHW course
                >>
                >> Rebecca,
                >>
                >> You sound like my kind of teacher. Thank you very much for your comments and success story.
                >>
                >> I will disagree with you on one point however.
                >>
                >> The Family Search Family Tree program does NOT (1) allow for the REPEATED use of the same source title (such as the 1900 U.S. census); nor (2) does it provide a place for the Citation Detail source reference.
                >>
                >> Therefore, you have to repeat the complete source title and citation detail reference with each of the 1,000 sources for each individual and when you multiply this by 50,000 names for which you have some source information, AS IT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED - the list of sources at the bottom of the tree will contain a reference list of 1,000 multiplied by 50,000. That will make the list useless.
                >>
                >> Terry Mason
                >> Clermont FL
                >>
                >> --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Read <rebecca-read@> wrote:
                >> >
                >> > <snip>
                >> > I agree that nFS does not contain sufficient space to put all the information from the cardboard box, but I disagree most vehemently that FS Family Tree has the same deficiency. Page 53 of the Family Tree Users Guide says "An individual can have up to 1,000 sources attached to him or her", and although "you cannot currently upload an image from your computer for use as a source ... you can upload the image to a photo sharing site and link to it there". If the source is available online, you can enter the URL - it's as easy as finding the record online and copying and pasting the address into the URL field in the source field provided (see p.58). I think this is brilliant! I'm busy uploading to photoloom.com all my scanned images, not just photos, but vital records, immigration records, wills etc.
                >> > The source fields in FS Family Tree provide examples of how to describe and cite sources. What more could we want?
                >> > <snip>
                >> > Overall, I think the Church's Family History Department is doing an excellent job. It is spoiling us with resources. At the same time, it is leaving room for us to use our initiative, be wise stewards and not be commanded in all things.
                >> >
                >> > Rebecca Read.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • tmason1
                Yes Allan, I ve posted to six or eight different Get Satisfaction postings and created one or two. I ve even written Ron directly following his invitation in
                Message 7 of 8 , Apr 8, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Yes Allan, I've posted to six or eight different "Get Satisfaction" postings and created one or two. I've even written Ron directly following his invitation in RootTech.

                  Doing Family History and the temple work of redemption is a commandment for our members. But software design of Family Search is not a theological issue and I think that task should invite and respect feedback.

                  Are the department managers still speaking in the training sessions with support missionaries? Do you have opportunity to dialogue with them or has that been discontinued?

                  In "The Ancestry Insider" on Friday, March 23, 2012 Dennis Brimhall seems rather apprehensive. As the new FH department CEO I hope he isn't closing the door on Jay's concept of Family Search being "an open organization" which encouraged responses.

                  Terry

                  --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Allan Hale <fatherhale@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Terry
                  >
                  > This is a great message. The first question is have you said this in Get Satisfaction on Family Tree. I started a thread when FT first came out that is nearly the same. The problem is that it does not look like they want to change this format very much no matter what we say. Ron Tanner used to monitor this venue and would comment once in a while but I do know that he does monitor Get Satisfaction. Those of us who are squeaking here need to squawk louder over there before they will do anything.
                  >
                  >
                  > Allan Hale
                  > WWS Missionary
                  >
                  <snip>
                • Allan Hale
                  Terry In WWS we have had a couple of meetings where folks from Data Quality the repairers of the system speak to us but not someone like Ron Tanner. Just at
                  Message 8 of 8 , Apr 9, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Terry

                    In WWS we have had a couple of meetings where folks from Data Quality the repairers of the system speak to us but not someone like Ron Tanner. Just at the conferences like Roots Tech and what was called the Utah Valley PAF users group. The DQ sessions are open but they are not the right people to speak with.


                    I will make a suggestion to our fearless leader to have him come prepared to answer question. Thank you for the idea.

                    But again the squeaky wheel gets the oil even if they do not like it so do not let up the pressure.


                    Allan




                    >________________________________
                    > From: tmason1 <tmason1@...>
                    >To: FHCNET@yahoogroups.com
                    >Sent: Sunday, April 8, 2012 10:07 PM
                    >Subject: [FHCNET] Re: Updating the Members Guide plus the T&FHW course
                    >
                    >

                    >Yes Allan, I've posted to six or eight different "Get Satisfaction" postings and created one or two. I've even written Ron directly following his invitation in RootTech.
                    >
                    >Doing Family History and the temple work of redemption is a commandment for our members. But software design of Family Search is not a theological issue and I think that task should invite and respect feedback.
                    >
                    >Are the department managers still speaking in the training sessions with support missionaries? Do you have opportunity to dialogue with them or has that been discontinued?
                    >
                    >In "The Ancestry Insider" on Friday, March 23, 2012 Dennis Brimhall seems rather apprehensive. As the new FH department CEO I hope he isn't closing the door on Jay's concept of Family Search being "an open organization" which encouraged responses.
                    >
                    >Terry
                    >
                    >--- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Allan Hale <fatherhale@...> wrote:
                    >>
                    >> Terry
                    >>
                    >> This is a great message. The first question is have you said this in Get Satisfaction on Family Tree. I started a thread when FT first came out that is nearly the same. The problem is that it does not look like they want to change this format very much no matter what we say. Ron Tanner used to monitor this venue and would comment once in a while but I do know that he does monitor Get Satisfaction. Those of us who are squeaking here need to squawk louder over there before they will do anything.
                    >>
                    >>
                    >> Allan Hale
                    >> WWS Missionary
                    >>
                    ><snip>
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.