Family Historian User Group

I am confused as to how I am to enter the information for a burial so that it appears on the mapping tool. Do I place the name of the cemetery in the place box along with actual town etc the person is buried? Or do I add the name of the cemetery along with physical address in the address box? Just looking to show on map where person died and was buried. Thanks

That is a recurring topic.
The FH Map Window only geocodes Place fields, and not Address fields.
So you may need to radically rethink your data entry format if you want address details to be geocoded.
However, the geocoding of street-level details is not well supported everywhere in the World via the Map Window.

See the FHUG Knowledge Base Working with Places and Addresses for New Users.
I realise you are not a brand new user, but that topic explains everything you need to know.
Even though it says it only applies to FH V4, V5, and V6, it does still apply to FH V7 that you are using.

If after digesting that advice, you have further questions then please ask again in this thread.

My tree started life outside FH, and place records are slightly more ad-hoc than the strict standard favoured by some here. So I would record just "Ireland" as the place, for example, not ",,Ireland", if that is all I have.

The only downside I can see is that the Place List window doesn't list Ireland alongside more specific entries, such as Dublin, Ireland or Cork, County Cork, Ireland. Geocoding works ok with this simple form. If I include leading commas, it tidies up the Place List Window, but still doesn't enforce correct sorting in the Places Records Window as far as I can see, and looks rather ugly in the Property Box display.

I realise there is no perfect solution that suits everybody, but just making the point that FH is perfectly happy with a slightly less rigid approach than is sometimes promoted - just be aware that any way of doing things has its downsides as well as its benefits.

If I include leading commas, it tidies up the Place List Window, but still doesn't enforce correct sorting in the Places Records Window as far as I can see,

Mark, you can configure the columns in the Places tab of the Records window to match the Work with Data>Places list. Then sorting on any column is possible, to bring together for example all the places in Ireland.
Just use =TextPart(%_PLAC%,1,1,STD) for the first part, etc.

Mark1834 wrote: ↑05 Mar 2021 10:34 My tree started life outside FH, and place records are slightly more ad-hoc than the strict standard favoured by some here. So I would record just "Ireland" as the place, for example, not ",,Ireland", if that is all I have. ...

That's what I do as well. One good reason I have for that, is that if I try to type ",,Ireland", my fingers go all awry about how many commas and where the spaces are between the commas (and if not, why not?). And (at least in v6) partially typing "Ireland" will not suggest ",,Ireland". Added to which, I have this habit of extending the number of elements of places names, which also plays havoc with me typing leading commas and spaces - are Irish place-names 4 or 5-part this week?

Thanks Lorna, that makes sense if you prefer a structured place format. I agree with Adrian's objections to the effect that formatting has on data entry (as well as exporting these FH-specific places for use elsewhere). However, I think there is a way to build on that suggestion that gives us the best of both worlds.

If the entered place is "Ireland", we define a standardized form, ",,Ireland". We then modify the Records Window columns to =TextIf(Exists(%_PLAC.STAN%),TextPart(%_PLAC.STAN%,1),TextPart(%_PLAC%,1)) etc to display a structured format using the standardized version if available or the standard version if not.

This improves the Records Window, without the disadvantages noted above. It's not perfect, as I would like to sort on Part 3, then Part 2, and finally Part 1, with blank entries at the top of the list, rather than sorting on just one column with an apparent arbitrary order to the others. I can't see a way of sorting the Records Window by multiple columns, so presumably that needs a query?

The Export Gedcom File plugin tidies Place and Address fields to remove blank column parts so they are Ok in other products.

In the Records Window, sort by clicking the header of Part 1, and then Part 2, and then Part 3.
They will then be sorted perfectly with Part 3 as primary key, Part 2 as secondary key, and Part 1 as tertiary key.

BTW: To create a Query, use the Configure Columns dialogue and click Save to Query... button.

Thanks Mike - even 3½ years into FH, I'm still learning stuff about the standard interface! I did check in the FH help, and couldn't find any reference to sorting the records window. It's not in the KB either as far as I can see, so I'll add a couple of sentences on how the sort works when I review and update that page for FH7.

I know the provided tools tidy up the place names, but I was thinking more about having to modify my own if I changed the place format.

Depends on what sort of changes to the Place format you are contemplating.
The Rearrange Address and Place Parts plugin might help.

Not sure if this is the thread for this - but I see "location elements" and "leading commas" being discussed. In prep for my move from RM to FH7, I am cleaning up my places/address to make sure they are consistent with my four element strategy: town, county, state/province, country before transferring the Gedcom file. Like all genealogists, I have events where all I had at the time was a state, country or maybe the source didn't provide more than the country. I have always entered these without leading commas. As I am cleaning them up in RM, I notice some have leading comma's and some don't. As Mark points out, FH seems happy with this "mix and match" in the places, but I was wondering what the advantage/dis advantage of entering a non standard place holder, like "unknown" or "needs research" in one or more of the elements. Certainly would mess up Geocodes, but I don't plan do do that at place level anyway, and thought it might be of value in the Place List Window to identify places that need more research. Any thoughts/input appreciated.

I'd be tempted to add a Note and configure the Places Record Window to show it, rather than add something into the Place itself. However, it wouldn't show up in the Work With Data > Places window, or the Map Window. If either of those are important to you, you may have no option but to use a place holder as you describe, but I'd make it in a Place element that you wouldn't use for anything else.

Place names are the same entity wherever they appear.
So Place field values in Facts are by definition the same as the Places tab list in the Records Window and listed in the Tools > Work with Data > Places tool.
So if you were to put Unknown in one it will appear in all the others, so I advise you don't do that.
Also, that word Unknown would appear in Diagrams, Reports, etc, etc, and would look a bit odd, and might upset Map Window geocoding.
In the Places tab of the Records Window there is a Note box in the Property Box for such things if you wish.
However, leaving unknown columns blank is understood to mean they are unknown.
The advantage of always having the same number of commas is the =TextPart(...) function can extract say the 4th column part and you know that is always a country, whereas the 1st column part is always a town.

tatewise wrote: ↑29 Mar 2021 16:46 However, leaving unknown columns blank is understood to mean they are unknown.

Or that they don't exist for that particular Place. If you have a approach to Places that covers many countries, there may be elements in some places that will never be completed -- not "unknown", but "non-existent". If somebody departed on a ship from Southampton, Hampshire, England I suggest that would only have 3 elements in cwhermanns scheme (no State/Province).

There may also be Places that can never be determined to the desired level of detail. I have a place for Pembrokeshire, Wales -- the source for the facts at that PLace are a Diary that mentions 'I ministered to the Church in Pembrokeshire' where the Church was in fact a set of groups of people, not a building. No amount of extra work is going to tie that to a more specific location.

Peter,
You can still keep your ‘tidy’ place name columns by adding the cemetery as a place, and manually geo-code it.
E.g. instead of using Warrington, Cheshire, England with a separate address of Warrington Cemetery
Use Warrington Cemetery, Cheshire, England as the place name instead, with no address.
Open the map window, find the location of the cemetery (expanding as necessary) then drag the new placename directly onto the map. It will then geocode it and add Lat & Long for you.

Helen & Mike. Thanks for your insights.
Am now seriously considering entering the entire address in the place field for mapping purposes which will result in at least six, comma separated elements. Will definitely need to sharpen my “comma counting” skills!

I'm trying to find the best method for my address/place records to use in the mapping window, I came to the conclusion to have 'address,place,county,country' in the place box, and it seems to work in the first few examples I tried, certainly in the map, the only strange thing is the data in the columns in the Place Records, all other windows seem ok,
see attached: I wonder if it's to do with my configuring the column 'Part 4', I used the expression =TextPart(%_PLAC%,4,4,STD) from Lorna's post.

cheers
Ian

Ian,

I believe the 3rd parameter should probably be "1" not "4". That parameter specifies how many sections (parts) to return.

Try =TextPart(%_PLAC%,2,1,STD), =TextPart(%_PLAC%,3,1,STD), etc.

See the help for TextPart.

Bill

Ian,
I just spotted that you use house number before Street Name in your address. I think you’ll find it better for the FH autocomplete function, if you use Street Name then House Number.
If you start typing 1, High Street, FH will present you with all addresses starting with 1, whereas start typing High Street, 1, and you’ll be presented with all addresses starting Hi, much more useful.

That to me is the major drawback with including the address part in your Placenames i.e. the amount of typing you need, to get a match with a similar address in the same town,.

Gowermick wrote: ↑07 Apr 2021 06:01 If you start typing 1, High Street, FH will present you with all addresses starting with 1, whereas start typing High Street, 1, and you’ll be presented with all addresses starting Hi, much more useful.

However, you will need to do some fancy footwork to display it properly in reports, websites etc.

That to me is the major drawback with including the address part in your Placenames i.e. the amount of typing you need, to get a match with a similar address in the same town,.

Depends how fast you type whether this is a real issue Having been taught to touch-type when I started my career in IT the amount of typing doesn't matter to me, so I use "number/building name, street. (Back in 1979, I was a girl and all girls had to know how to touch type, even if they weren't going to be working in the data entry pool and even if they had Engineer in their job title!)

ColeValleyGirl wrote: ↑07 Apr 2021 06:39 However, you will need to do some fancy footwork to display it properly in reports, websites etc.

Depends on your version of properly! The Dutch and I suspect others, use Street Name first. Which when you think about it is more logical, i.e. when looking for a property, you find the street first, then find the house! Even modern GPS do it that way

Mike, if you're displaying an place and address by the UK convention, street comes second and anyone following the Dutch convention for English addresses will raise a lot of eyebrows among their family.

ColeValleyGirl wrote: ↑07 Apr 2021 07:58 Mike, if you're displaying an place and address by the UK convention, street comes second and anyone following the Dutch convention for English addresses will raise a lot of eyebrows among their family.

Maybe, but they’ll have to be really thick if they don’t understand what I meant

Well, they might understand what you meant and privately think you're illiterate (which of course you're not).

I shall continue to follow the conventions of the country in which the address exists.

BillH wrote: ↑07 Apr 2021 02:13 Ian,

I believe the 3rd parameter should probably be "1" not "4". That parameter specifies how many sections (parts) to return.

Try =TextPart(%_PLAC%,2,1,STD), =TextPart(%_PLAC%,3,1,STD), etc.

See the help for TextPart.

Bill

Thanks Bill, that solved the problem, I'm an absolute beginner when it comes to expressions, looked at help for TextPart and it was completely over my head

Gowermick wrote: ↑07 Apr 2021 06:01 Ian,
I just spotted that you use house number before Street Name in your address. I think you’ll find it better for the FH autocomplete function, if you use Street Name then House Number.
If you start typing 1, High Street, FH will present you with all addresses starting with 1, whereas start typing High Street, 1, and you’ll be presented with all addresses starting Hi, much more useful.

That to me is the major drawback with including the address part in your Placenames i.e. the amount of typing you need, to get a match with a similar address in the same town,.

Thanks Mike, my plan is to use the Place Records columns to search for towns, then scroll through addresses to the required location (once I get my Place records to decent standard !). But I may yet switch to your idea.

I'm really enjoying FH7, especially the Mapping

thanks for all the advice so far

"I'll be back"

cheers
ian