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

RE: [FHCNET] FS - Family Tree > Entering Sources, Notes and Other Events

Expand Messages
  • sm99923
    Terry/Venita, With the greatest respect I must offer a different view than the procedure advocated by Venita. I mentioned in a previous reply that FT is
    Message 1 of 23 , Apr 11, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Terry/Venita,

      With the greatest respect I must offer a different view than the procedure
      advocated by Venita.

      I mentioned in a previous reply that FT is subtlety edging us away from the
      traditional use of "Notes" with its promotion of properly recording our
      sources (with any Notes pertaining to each source) and the use of FT
      "Stories".

      Contrary to Venita's view, my view (and that advocated by the use of FT) is
      that all sources for an individual or relationship should be recorded as
      sources. Some sources will be related to what are called the "Vital
      Information" for an individual - Name, Gender, Birth, Christening, Death or
      Burial . . . and in FT can be so tagged (associated) with these items of
      "vital information" (not "events"). Other sources for the individual or
      relationships are simply - and accurately - linked/associated with the
      individual or relationship - there is no need for the creation of "dummy
      events" in order to link a source to it.

      So I would recommend that the examples of census, book and obituary sources
      that Venita quotes as adding to her "Notes" is not a practice advised in the
      use of FT (to which you might add military, school, business, tax, wills
      etc. etc.) - all of which whether primary or secondary sources are expected
      to be added to FT as sources.

      FT is really breaking up the "old" concept of "Notes" and substituting a
      better use of defining all sources plus the FT facilities for Stories and
      Photos.

      In FT as each source is added - or later edited - there is a "Notes"
      facility for each source - it is in this "Notes" for each source that you
      can record your assessment of each source and any particular judgement you
      have made of the source.

      I know that various FH software products offer the option to record the
      "Actual Text" of the source . . . something I used extensively before the
      option became available to attach an image of the source document . . .
      after which, with the actual document image available, I considered any
      added transcription of the source document to be irrelevant and so stopped
      adding in the "Actual Text" of the source document. If there was anything in
      the source document that was either indistinct or could be possibly
      transcribed with differing spelling then such issues are better described in
      the source "Notes" than adding some "actual text" with my particular
      interpretation of the text.

      In summary - the answer to . . . "Where/How do I offer my evaluation
      comments about the misleading errors found in the above references in the
      Details in the 'Sources' template in FS - Family Tree?"

      . . . is in the "Notes" box under the Details for each
      source.

      You might also consider starting a "Discussion" about what you consider the
      errors in particular sources for any individual that may more prominently
      attract the attention of any other researcher who may feel inclined to act
      on what you have considered to be inaccurate data within the source.

      ===Stewart




      -----Original Message-----
      From: FHCNET@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FHCNET@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
      Venita
      Sent: 11 April 2013 01:52
      To: FHCNET@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [FHCNET] FS - Family Tree > Entering Sources, Notes and Other
      Events

      My personal procedure, Terry:

      In my personal database, I only "source" vital events (i.e. birth,
      christening, marriage, death, burial) by citing the primary record for each
      event as much as possible. I do my best to find the church or government
      record for each event for each person. I use my program's source template
      to create a source for a particular parish (for example) and link that
      source to every event for every person that it applies to. One of my
      sources is Utah Death Certificates, 1904-1961. There are around 600 people
      in my database who fall into that group, and I can attach that source to
      each one of them. When I am able to see a digital image of a document, I
      can copy the exact words on it and save them in an individual's notes, as
      well as attach a source citation to the event. For at least my direct line
      ancestors, I collect digital images of documents and attach them to the
      person as I do a photo.

      Other supporting information goes into the individuals' notes. When I find
      a census for a family (a secondary source, by the way) I copy the data into
      the notes for each individual shown in the family, including the year of the
      census and the location of the family home. When I find a quote in a book
      (another secondary source) I copy the quote into the notes with a brief
      source statement at the end of the quote. When I find an obituary (a
      primary source for death & burial, and secondary for other data) I copy it
      into the notes followed by a brief statement identifying which newspaper
      published it. I do the same with a will.

      My database currently has 12K+ entries, but there are only 135 master souces
      in my list. I can easily find the source I need, and occasionally create a
      new one when necessary. Sources is sources and notes is notes, and the two
      should not be confused. A source points to the record of a particular
      event; notes add information or explanations regarding the event.

      My database (as of a few months ago) is posted on my website. If you care
      to have a look, you may go to
      http://www.venitap.com/Genealogy/WebCards/wc_toc.htm Feel free to click
      links and snoop around. :-)

      Yours,

      Venita


      On Apr 10, 2013, at 4:16 PM, tmason1 <tmason1@...> wrote:

      > I can cite the Hopewell Friends history, 1734-1934, Frederick County,
      Virginia and list a URL to google books showing their INCORRECT birthdate
      for my 4th great grandfather.
      >
      > That incorrect information was cited by a well referenced secondary
      publication in 1899 but she listed this ancestor of mine not only by the
      incorrect birth date but with incorrect parents.
      >
      > A third reference is William Nelson, New Jersey biographical and
      genealogical notes from the volumes of the New Jersey archives; Originally
      published: New Jersey Historical Society, 1916. FHL US/CAN Film XXXX. This
      give my 4th gg-father's correct birth date but incorrectly lists his
      father's second wife as my 4th great grandmother.
      >
      > Finally in an article in the William & Mary magazine - October 1931 - pg
      326 the author/researcher discounts the second reference and correctly gives
      my relative's correct parents, birth date, wife and 10 children. We have
      confirmed his accuracy with other records.
      >
      > My question to you is "Where/How do I offer my evaluation comments about
      the misleading errors found in the above references in the Details in the
      'Sources' template in FS - Family Tree?"
      >
      > Terry Mason
      > Clermont FL
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



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

      or send blank email to FHCNET-subscribe@yahoogroupsYahoo! Groups Links
    • Robert Givens
      The source feature at family search is not really a source but more correctly a citation for a source. It isn t intended to be a full feature source
      Message 2 of 23 , Apr 11, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        The "source" feature at family search is not really a source but more correctly a "citation" for a source. It isn't intended to be a full feature source because the general public has shown they won't embrace the cumbersome process of making a full blown source for records. For every one of us who is an accomplished genealogist there are hundreds and thousands of potential users who would be, and are, turned off by a complex process of creating a full blown source. This feature isn't going to change so we need to use what we have to the fullest.
        Sources in Family tree have 5 fields you can use to tailor a citation the way you want it.
        Title - self explanatory - What is it and for whom
        Link to Web page - if applicable - use it
        Where Record is Found - This is where you will put most of those true Source fields.
        Notes - this can be for a transcription but can also be for analysis of the source
        Reason this source is attached - this field too can be used creatively as you see fit. Most of the comments about where can we put this or that can go here or in Notes.

        You know the real issue is, in my eyes, is Family Tree going to be the repository of all your research or is it going to be 1. A tool for submitting names to the temple for LDS members, 2. A correct lineage of our LDS members ancestry with correct ordinances attached (that correct record worthy of all acceptation), 3. plus a place for other interested people to place their ancestry.

        The Brethren (and they drive this project) want the system to be engaging to the novice so IMHO it will never fully satisfy the professional genealogist among us - but it isn't intended to to that. If the Church is going to reach out beyond the 2.5% of the dedicated genealogists a less cumbersome system has to be in place.

        My goal is to clean up my pedigree, post what is needed to identify my ancestors and other relatives, post some of my pictures and stories to grab the interest of my grandchildren but above everything else - keep submitting those of my family that have been properly identified for their temple ordinances. Anything beyond that to me is fluff in so far as Family Search Family Tree is concerned. My RootsMagic data base has all the extra sources and notes that aren't absolutely needed on Family Tree and in my data base it isn't going to be tampered with by the public.

        Just my opinions.
        Bob Givens

        --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, "tmason1" <tmason1@...> wrote:
        >
        > Notes:
        > In personal software programs a "notes" window is a blank field where you can enter almost anything you know about a person or marriage. Most biographical data would including such things as anecdotes, stories, journal entries, and quotes by the individual. The notes field is also a place to record facts such as places where a person has lived, passenger lists, deeds, city directory entries and obituaries.
        >
        > Other Events:
        > Personal software programs allow users to place "Other Events" on the "Edit Individual" screen. I have used this option consistently for all Census and Military records. Popular Other Events might be Journal entries, LDS blessings, Cremation, Mission, Probate records (including wills) and Land records.
        >
        > Sources cite the location of information. In personal software programs, sources contain the following "bibliography" data entry fields: Source Title, Author, Publication Information, Source/Call Number, Repository Name & Address, Film/Volume/Page Number, Date of Entry, plus Actual Text (Extractions) and Comments.
        >
        > In personal software - SOURCES may be connected to births, christenings, marriages, deaths, burials and also to all the "Other Events" which are used to document a person's identity. There is even a "General Records" event to which sources may be attached.
        >
        > In contrast in FS - FAMILY TREE all sources connect only to the Vital Information fields of: Name, Gender, Birth, Christening, Death and Burial and the connection is only done by using a "Tag" option.
        >
        > Have you noticed that FS - Family Tree software can contain "Other Information" fields used to identify a relationship, such as a census record or a will, but that there is no means of linking or attaching a source to it?
        >
        > Also have you noticed that it seems we can not edit the Source Title if the title was created by "My Source Box"?
        >
        > (1) Are you having difficulty transferring all the details from your personal software source information into the Family Search - Family Tree template?
        >
        > (2) What are you doing with all the information that I listed above that one would place into NOTES?
        >
        > (3) If you have source documentation for OTHER EVENTS, how are you entering it into Family Tree and tagging them?
        >
        > (4) There is no place to add a comment about the quality or accuracy of the data found within a source. What are you doing to comment about misleading information in a sources you cite? In personal software that evaluation is placed in the "Comment" field attached to a source. Personal evaluation of a source should be entered in a field associated with the source document instead of the Family Tree "Discussions" field. What are you doing about this?
        >
        > To me it seems premature to release Family Tree to the public when the data entry fields that are needed to effectively identify a person have not yet been placed into this beta software.
        >
        > Until sources and notes are brought over from new.FamilySearch and third-party software shows us how our source documentation, notes and other events from personal software programs will be entered into Family Tree I think we are running before the Family Tree software is ready.
        >
        > Terry Mason
        > Clermont FL
        >
      • sm99923
        Terry, First of all . . . the source recording in nFS was a pathetic joke . . . totally inadequate and now thoroughly disowned in FT . . . personally, I
        Message 3 of 23 , Apr 11, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Terry,



          First of all . . . the source recording in nFS was a pathetic joke . . .
          totally inadequate and now thoroughly disowned in FT . . . personally, I
          cannot see how they could ever transfer sources from nFS to FT.



          Better to start from scratch in FT.



          As in all my other replies on this topic . . . you need to forget about
          attaching sources to any form of "invented" event . . . sources are for a
          person or relationship.



          You have correctly identified the key to any source as the source citation.



          FS does itself no favours by - in my view - in not producing good source
          citations; a good source citation should be readable and make sense to the
          reader - FS usually fail on both counts.



          A source citation should tell . . . What the Source is / Indication of
          Quality / Where the source record can be found

          (if taken from a
          web site it should additionally state the origin for the web record and the
          full citation of the originating body)



          For many FS sources finding the originating body requires further
          investigation beyond the "presenting" FS source page - usually following up
          in the catalogue to trace any source film number quoted on the FS Source
          page.



          So a typical FS source may be given a citation like:



          Baptism: James Warren 1832, familysearch.org, Transcription, FHL Film
          1279361; citing - C of E Parish Registers for Cliffe-Pypard, 1576-1874,
          Wiltshire County Record Office



          As opposed to the FS generated citation: "England, Births and Christenings,
          1538-1975," index, FamilySearch
          (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/J9FS-6XF : accessed 11 Apr 2013),
          James Warren, 16 Mar 1832.

          (Is it a birth or christening - the film
          number details make clear it is a baptism; the url is repeated in the url
          box; the date accessed has no value; only by following up the source film
          number can the originating
          source be determined)

          As noted in a previous post amending such a FS generated source requires the
          FS source to be copied then deleted - the copied source can have any field
          amended to suit.

          An added-in source could have a citation like:

          Family of William & Mary Strange 1891 Census
          England, Digital Copy, ancestry.co.uk; citing UK National Archives RG12,
          Piece 2658, Folio 34, Page 12

          (in this case the url would be to a MS SkyDrive pdf
          copy of the census page . . . my personal method for storing the digitised
          copies of source material - the reader may not have access to Ancestry, but
          with the National Archives citation can look for the
          census page anywhere else.)

          The key to any good citation is that it understandable by the (normal -
          regular) reader . . . not always the case when following particular academic
          standards for source citations . . . feel free to make it up to satisfy
          yourself.

          In summary . . . your question . . . "Family Tree does NOT let me attach the
          1900 Census source link, my extraction nor my comment to the "CUSTOM EVENT".

          Forget all usage of any form of custom event . . . there are no events in FT
          . . . sources are only attached to persons or relationships.

          With digital images available . . . transcriptions of actual text are
          considered irrelevant . . . any special comments about difficult to read
          words can be put in the "Notes" box of any source. The "Notes" box for any
          source can be used to record any comments or qualification you have about
          the source.

          Not sure what you mean by "Family Tree does NOT let me attach the 1900
          Census source link . . " . . . the only "source link" I can think of is the
          web url to where a source document can be found - and FT does allow you to
          this . . . . if creating a source where the source came from commercial
          provider (like Ancestry) it would be irrelevant to insert the ancestry url
          as that would only be usable by anyone with an ancestry subscription .. . .
          . FT has given us to understand it is in the process of developing storage
          for images of source documents which we can upload in the same manner as
          photos but also be able to attach to our sources . . . however the facility
          does exist now for you to use any other "cloud" provider to store your
          digitised documents (I use MS SkyDrive) which can provide a unique url for
          each source document which can be used in the source definition.

          I hope this helps . . . in some wayJ

          ===Stewart















          From: FHCNET@yahoogroups.com [mailto:FHCNET@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          tmason1
          Sent: 10 April 2013 22:42
          To: FHCNET@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [FHCNET] Re: FS - Family Tree > Entering Sources, Notes and Other
          Events





          In personal software programs, if I create an entry for a 1900 U.S. census
          record I have to click on "Add - Other Events" or "Options" then select
          "census" and then create/select a Source Title for the census. The source
          identifier to me is the NARA (National Archives and Records Administration)
          number. The designation for that is "T623" and it is followed by a roll
          number and then a page number. Ancestry.com is inclined to list the FHL
          microfilm number. FamilySearch uses something called the GS Film number
          followed by a Digital Folder Number. Neither accurately identify the NARA
          number which is the most primary source for the census record.

          My point for this discussion however, is that into personal software, I can
          attach the source identifier and my personal extraction of the image and my
          personal comment (if needed) about information I found in the record.

          From my software I have synchronized that data into new.FamilySearch and
          that census information has been brought over into FS - Family Tree and
          displays in "CUSTOM EVENT". In nFS I could manually add my extraction detail
          from the "Actual Text" field and my evaluation from the "Comments" field.
          That information is now in new.FamilySearch but does not display in Family
          Tree.

          Family Tree does NOT let me attach the 1900 Census source link, my
          extraction nor my comment to the "CUSTOM EVENT".

          New.FamilySearch DID but Family Tree DOES NOT.

          That sure bothers me; why doesn't it concern any of you?

          Terry Mason
          Clermont, FL





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • tmason1
          Venita, You have a nice personal web site. You are getting good use from your personal software program. I too have a nice personal web site. My question was,
          Message 4 of 23 , Apr 11, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Venita,

            You have a nice personal web site. You are getting good use from your personal software program. I too have a nice personal web site.

            My question was, "In FS - Family Tree, where does one make evaluation type of comments about misleading errors found in the source Notes?"

            I don't think you answered my question.

            I do not think the Family Tree software is designed to synchronize with personal software programs.

            Terry Mason
            Clermont, FL
          • tmason1
            Good use of logic in stating the inadequacy of the source features in Family Tree. Thank you for taking the time and making the effort. If you think Family
            Message 5 of 23 , Apr 11, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Good use of logic in stating the inadequacy of the source features in Family Tree. Thank you for taking the time and making the effort.

              If you think Family Tree is inadequate then are you resolved to letting it force conforming to something that less than useful. Are you suggesting that a good researcher or librarian would not use it?

              When you suggest starting over with Family Tree, I don't think any of us want to discard the last 130 years of temple record submissions. The combined records and IOUS information of new.FamilySearch have left us with a real mess and it is possible that the less than inadequate source entry fields means that Family Tree will not do the job as it is currently designed either.

              Sure, make it simple for the novice, but the department needs to provide the means for detail sourcing and upward compatability with personal software programs. If they do not, then Family Tree is nothing more that a replacement for the Temple Ready program.

              Terry Mason

              --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, <stew999@...> wrote:
              >
              > First of all . . . the source recording in nFS was a pathetic joke . . .
              > totally inadequate and now thoroughly disowned in FT . . . personally, I
              > cannot see how they could ever transfer sources from nFS to FT.
              >
              > Better to start from scratch in FT.
              >
              > As in all my other replies on this topic . . . you need to forget about
              > attaching sources to any form of "invented" event . . . sources are for a
              > person or relationship.
              >
              > You have correctly identified the key to any source as the source citation.
              >
              > FS does itself no favours by - in my view - in not producing good source
              > citations; a good source citation should be readable and make sense to the
              > reader - FS usually fail on both counts.
              >
              > A source citation should tell . . . What the Source is / Indication of
              > Quality / Where the source record can be found taken from a
              > web site it should additionally state the origin for the web record and the
              > full citation of the originating body)
              >
              > For many FS sources finding the originating body requires further
              > investigation beyond the "presenting" FS source page - usually following up
              > in the catalogue to trace any source film number quoted on the FS Source
              > page.
              >
              > So a typical FS source may be given a citation like:
              >
              > Baptism: James Warren 1832, familysearch.org, Transcription, FHL Film
              > 1279361; citing - C of E Parish Registers for Cliffe-Pypard, 1576-1874,
              > Wiltshire County Record Office
              >
              > As opposed to the FS generated citation: "England, Births and Christenings,
              > 1538-1975," index, FamilySearch
              > (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/J9FS-6XF : accessed 11 Apr 2013),
              > James Warren, 16 Mar 1832.
              >
              >(Is it a birth or christening - the film
              > number details make clear it is a baptism; the url is repeated in the url
              > box; the date accessed has no value; only by following up the source film
              > number can the originating
              > source be determined)
              >
              > As noted in a previous post amending such a FS generated source requires the
              > FS source to be copied then deleted - the copied source can have any field
              > amended to suit.
              >
              > An added-in source could have a citation like:
              >
              >Family of William & Mary Strange 1891 Census
              > England, Digital Copy, ancestry.co.uk; citing UK National Archives RG12,
              > Piece 2658, Folio 34, Page 12
              >
              >(in this case the url would be to a MS SkyDrive pdf
              > copy of the census page . . . my personal method for storing the digitised
              > copies of source material - the reader may not have access to Ancestry, but
              > with the National Archives citation can look for the
              > census page anywhere else.)
              >
              > The key to any good citation is that it understandable by the (normal -
              > regular) reader . . . not always the case when following particular academic
              > standards for source citations . . . feel free to make it up to satisfy
              > yourself.
              >
              > In summary . . . your question . . . "Family Tree does NOT let me attach the
              > 1900 Census source link, my extraction nor my comment to the "CUSTOM EVENT".
              >
              > Forget all usage of any form of custom event . . . there are no events in FT
              > . . . sources are only attached to persons or relationships.
              >
              > With digital images available . . . transcriptions of actual text are
              > considered irrelevant . . . any special comments about difficult to read
              > words can be put in the "Notes" box of any source. The "Notes" box for any
              > source can be used to record any comments or qualification you have about
              > the source.
              >
              > Not sure what you mean by "Family Tree does NOT let me attach the 1900
              > Census source link . . " . . . the only "source link" I can think of is the
              > web url to where a source document can be found - and FT does allow you to
              > this . . . . if creating a source where the source came from commercial
              > provider (like Ancestry) it would be irrelevant to insert the ancestry url
              > as that would only be usable by anyone with an ancestry subscription .. . .
              > . FT has given us to understand it is in the process of developing storage
              > for images of source documents which we can upload in the same manner as
              > photos but also be able to attach to our sources . . . however the facility
              > does exist now for you to use any other "cloud" provider to store your
              > digitised documents (I use MS SkyDrive) which can provide a unique url for
              > each source document which can be used in the source definition.
              >
              > I hope this helps . . . in some way
              >
              > ===Stewart
            • Venita
              Hi Terry, Sorry about missing that point. There are two places you can put explanatory information. The first one is in the notes of a vital record. For
              Message 6 of 23 , Apr 12, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Terry,

                Sorry about missing that point.

                There are two places you can put explanatory information. The first one is in the notes of a vital record. For example, if the information is in regard to the name, click the name, then click "Edit." Put your comments in the "Reason This Information is Correct" field. (Of course, the procedure would be the same for each bit of vital information.)

                The other place is in the source citation itself, even if it's a FS-created source. In an FS-created source, before you click "Attach", click the title, then "View." The source will open on another page, and you will see a "Notes" field at the bottom. Click "Add" and Bob's your Uncle! Save, attach, and remove from your SB.

                Personally, I would put the explanation in both places. Your comment won't be obvious on the person's page, but if someone is curious enough to open the details of the vital information, they will see the note you attached to the name/event, and the source you attached and tagged, including the note you added to the source.

                I hope this helps!

                Yours,

                Venita



                On Apr 11, 2013, at 9:00 PM, tmason1 <tmason1@...> wrote:

                > Venita,
                >
                > You have a nice personal web site. You are getting good use from your personal software program. I too have a nice personal web site.
                >
                > My question was, "In FS - Family Tree, where does one make evaluation type of comments about misleading errors found in the source Notes?"
                >
                > I don't think you answered my question.
                >
                > I do not think the Family Tree software is designed to synchronize with personal software programs.
                >
                > Terry Mason
                > Clermont, FL
                >
                >



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • tmason1
                ... Perhaps you could create this in an actual PID number on Family Tree and the give us a reference so we could look at it.
                Message 7 of 23 , Apr 14, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In FHCNET@yahoogroups.com, Venita <venitar@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > The other place is in the source citation itself, even if it's a FS-created source. In an FS-created source, before you click "Attach", click the title, then "View." The source will open on another page, and you will see a "Notes" field at the bottom. Click "Add" and Bob's your Uncle! Save, attach, and remove from your SB.

                  Perhaps you could create this in an actual PID number on Family Tree and the give us a reference so we could look at it.
                • tmason1
                  Currently there is not a possibility for synchrony between the source entry fields in personal 3rd party software programs and the templates provided for data
                  Message 8 of 23 , Apr 14, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Currently there is not a possibility for synchrony between the source entry fields in personal 3rd party software programs and the templates provided for data entry in Family Tree.

                    The following TWO (2) modifications to Family Tree are needed:
                    (1) A COMMENTS field following Source Notes and
                    (2) being able to document "Other Information" with Sources.

                    Have any of you ever opened the Family Tree "Other Information" field and clicked on the "+Add" and found that you can add the following: Alternate Name / Stillborn, Bar Mitzvah, Bat Mitzvah, Military Service, Naturalization, Residence, Affiliation, Religious Affiliation, Title of Nobility, Occupation, Cremation, Custom Event / Caste Name, Clan Name, National Identification, National Origin, Physical Description, Race, Tribe Name, Custom Fact? If you did then you might notice there is no way to add a source to it like you could in new.FamilySearch.

                    So since Family Tree is in beta test the two modification could be made. Currently the following five (5) Family Tree SOURCE FIELDS are:

                    1) SOURCE TITLE >

                    2) Web page URL >

                    3) CITATION >
                    [This is the same as information as in new.FamilySearch Source Type when combined with nFS Source detail. (Includes Author, Publication Information, Repository, Call Number, Film/Volume/Page Number, Date record was made)]

                    4) Describe the Record - NOTES >
                    [This is the same as "Actual Text" in nFS. (This is the weakest feature of the nFS source entry process.)]

                    5) REASON THIS SOURCE IS ATTACHED >


                    MODIFICATION ONE: The one Family Tree entry field missing in Create or edit a Source is a COMMENT field following the Notes field. There is one in nFS and it is in personal software programs. It is needed in Family Tree to make the Source fields synchrony compatible.

                    It is NOT appropriate to place COMMENTS in the "Discussion field" because that is detached from the Source. Discussions work like social networking sites - they are NOT a place to put evaluations or comments about the Source "Notes".

                    Could the Comments be placed in the "Reason This Information is Attached" field? Perhaps - IF we used a tag like reference in our Notes section which indicated that something was in error or see comment below, etc.


                    MODIFICATION TWO: Family Tree does not allow attaching SOURCES to "+Add" OTHER INFORMATION fields in Family Tree. If this expanded option was added to Family Tree then the EVENT or FACT "NOTES" that are currently entered in new.FamilySearch can be placed there.

                    Add these two modifications and make Family Tree compatable with personal software programs.

                    Terry Mason
                    Clermont FL

                    P.S. Wonder when and where the general NOTES already in new.FamilySearch will be? Hope to see them sooner than later.

                    Also we have been promised that IMAGES of documentation will be available in the same way that the PHOTOS options is designed for the person in Family Tree. I hope that all scrapbook images from our personal computers that our personal software point to, can be uploaded to a secure Family Search site and that our pointers in personal software can be redirected to URLs on the permanent FS locations.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.