* Copying a Fact and all associated roles

[BenOakster]

I have several census facts that I imported from TMG tags, complete with multiple roles and sentences, and the sentences seem to have been imported correctly.

I want to create a new census fact by copying an existing one so that I don't have to rebuild all of the sentences and create all of the roles. I can't seem to do it though. If I copy a fact I then have to save it to extended set which then just hides and disables it and I also can't change the title.

How do I do this?

[tatewise]

The short answer is that you cannot because you cannot change the fundamental Name of the Fact code.

May I suggest an alternative approach.
I suspect the TMG imported facts have a custom Census event for each decade.
It would be much better in the long run if you used the standard FH/GEDCOM single Census event.
That is discussed in the FHUG Knowledge Base > Importing to Family Historian in the Import from The Master Genealogist (TMG) section under Correcting Problems with further advice in Recording from a Census Record that explains the benefits.

It should be possible to create one FH Fact Type definition for the standard Census event that supports whatever you need to achieve. However, it is worth seriously considering whether you need Fact Witness Roles at all, or to assign a Census event to each member of the household.

There are tools provided to achieve the necessary changes to those new concepts.

After reviewing the advice articles referenced above please post your reactions.

[BenOakster]

Thanks again for answering my questions.

I've looked over those articles and it sounds like a lot of changing in TMG, importing, running plugins to sort out the import and then checking the outcome before maybe tweaking it again and repeating the process.

In all honesty I'm beginning to think that converting to FH7 is a lot of work for what seems like a few little features that are nice but not necessary compared to things that I will lose by not using TMG. I still have 3 weeks with the free trial to make a decision I guess.

[tatewise]

Please remember that TMG is frozen in time and unsupported, whereas all other popular products are regularly adding new features. FH often appears highly rated in reviews.
I suspect you have not yet fully explored all its features, some of which have hidden depths.

Here we are only discussing one small aspect of conversion which is caused by the TMG UK version straying away from the international agreed standard for Census events that is used by all the popular products. Strangely, the TMG US version sticks to the standard Census event, which is far more portable. However, you don't have to follow my suggestion. You could continue with the custom Census events for each decade. To create similar custom events for other decades in FH will require manual construction, unless of course you can create them in TMG before migration to FH.

Perhaps some TMG converts here could post how they managed the migration and why they prefer FH.

What TMG features do you believe will be lost after conversion to FH?

[BenOakster]

TMG being unsupported is one of the reasons I was looking at FH but in reality it still works. If it didn't work or was about to not work then I would 'have' to change but at the moment I don't have to and so all these little snags make it harder to want to change.

In TMG I use flags that have multiple values which I then use to create reports and produce lists and subsets of individuals quickly.
I can easily duplicate tags and sources, and also quick fill data using F3 when adding the same tag or source to multiple individuals.
I find the sentence creation more straightforward in TMG. FH seems more complex to me and is akin to programming and isn't intuitive and I find the help articles difficult too.

Things I do like in FH7 are the general layout and appearance. I like the map feature although its not really something I need. I did feel like I was getting there and I have customised layouts, in the different windows to make it more how I want but having to change all of the census tags, adjust a lot of sentences and roles, repeatedly tweak things and reimport over and over to see if the issues have resolved seems a lot, and I also have to pay for the program, inevitable I know, but its just another hurdle to overcome when trying to decide.

I have also heard that FH is run by a very small number of people that is getting smaller and so it is potentially at risk of not being continued in the future due to similar reasons that ended TMG. I don't want to spend a lot of time learning all of this to be in the same place as I am with TMG in a few years time. I understand this may not be the case of course, it was just some internet rumour.

As it stands I'm not sure that the benefits of FH7 override these points.

[tatewise]

TMG being unsupported is one of the reasons I was looking at FH but in reality it still works. If it didn't work or was about to not work then I would 'have' to change but at the moment I don't have to and so all these little snags make it harder to want to change.

The catch 22 is you don't know when TMG will hit a snag and stop working; then it will be too late to make changes in TMG to simplify migration to another product, which will probably be needed whatever one you choose.

In TMG I use flags that have multiple values which I then use to create reports and produce lists and subsets of individuals quickly.

I suspect few other products have multiple value flags so that will probably have to change when you migrate.
FH supports Named Lists that would offer a similar capability, or you could use custom Attributes.
It is easy to use each imported Flag & value to create a Named List to hold the flagged Individuals.

I can easily duplicate tags and sources, and also quick fill data using F3 when adding the same tag or source to multiple individuals.

FH has both Copy & Paste Fact (which includes the Source Citations) and Copy & Paste Citation (Ctrl+C & V). It also has the Automatic Source Citations feature and other tools for adding multiple Facts &/or Source Citations.

I find the sentence creation more straightforward in TMG. FH seems more complex to me and is akin to programming and isn't intuitive and I find the help articles difficult too.

I wonder if your familiarity with TMG sentence creation is simply due to years of use and perhaps it was not quite so intuitive when you first started using it. Anyway, in many cases the FH defaults are perfectly adequate.

Things I do like in FH7 are the general layout and appearance. I like the map feature although its not really something I need. I did feel like I was getting there and I have customised layouts, in the different windows to make it more how I want but having to change all of the census tags, adjust a lot of sentences and roles, repeatedly tweak things and reimport over and over to see if the issues have resolved seems a lot, and I also have to pay for the program, inevitable I know, but its just another hurdle to overcome when trying to decide.

As I said, you don't have to change all the census tags, it was just a suggestion, but I suspect it would be an issue whatever product you eventually migrate to because they all prefer the GEDCOM standard CENSus tag.

I have also heard that FH is run by a very small number of people that is getting smaller and so it is potentially at risk of not being continued in the future due to similar reasons that ended TMG. I don't want to spend a lot of time learning all of this to be in the same place as I am with TMG in a few years time. I understand this may not be the case of course, it was just some internet rumour.

The support for FH and replies to support enquiries continue undiminished as far as I am aware and I don't have a crystal ball.

As it stands I'm not sure that the benefits of FH7 override these points.

Do any TMG expats have anything to add?

[BenOakster]

Don't get me wrong, if I can do all TMG does in FH7 added with the things I prefer in FH then I would certainly switch.

Maybe if any TMG users could contact me, I'd be happy to go through with them how to do the things I think I can't and for them to show me the benefits of changing.

[ColeValleyGirl]

I have also heard that FH is run by a very small number of people that is getting smaller and so it is potentially at risk of not being continued in the future due to similar reasons that ended TMG. I don't want to spend a lot of time learning all of this to be in the same place as I am with TMG in a few years time. I understand this may not be the case of course, it was just some internet rumour.

Every piece of software is at risk of being discontinued whether it's produced by a megacompany or a very small one. At least if you migrate to FH your data isn't locked into a proprietary format. Yes, FH has some custom Gedcom extensions but that isn't a showstopper if you need to migrate away. The data is in text format. If a future destination can't deal with that, you may have to decide what functionality to jettison, but that's life.

I have no knowledge of Calico Pie's staffing but I have worked with a number of very small IT companies with big reach. It's no longer necessary for an organisation like CP to carry developers on their books - the marketplace for coders is worldwide and very competitive. For example I've worked with an organisation whose software is baked in to some pretty significant international organisations. It was one man in the Netherlands with the vision setting the direction and architecture and a bunch of developers hired as necessary from all over the world. So don't write off an organisation based on their headcount. Yes, if the individual with the vision goes away there might be a problem. But your FH data will still be accessible and Gedcom compliant.

[Gowermick]

I totally agree with Helen about software trying to lock you in with bespoke data files. That’s one reason I moved from Family Tree Maker (FTM). I wanted to do something that wasn’t provided within FTM, but there was nothing I could do, which as someone with a computing degree, I found very frustrating.

My eyes were opened when I moved to FH, where I found all their data is stored in a simpe Gedcom text file. So even if Calico Pie gave up on FH, I will still have my data readily accessible, ready to move to another programme.

[Bobh1]

Do any TMG expats have anything to add?

I am also having serious issues about commiting to a move to FH from TMG.

Multiple value flags is one issue, but the other primary one is highlighted by your advice "It should be possible to create one FH Fact Type definition for the standard Census event that supports whatever you need to achieve. However, it is worth seriously considering whether you need Fact Witness Roles at all, or to assign a Census event to each member of the household." The Family Historian community seems to be committed to not using witnesses, when I see them as the only sensible way to record a household event such as a census. How else can you record that "Joe was recorded in the census living with his grandfather Joe snr"

[BenOakster]

You can just continue to complete census entry using witnesses as you did in TMG which is what I will do if I switch.

The advice given is not saying that it has to be done that way, just that this is how the program was set up. It does still work using witnesses from what I see of the many census tags I have imprted. As we did with TMG, people used it in differing ways to record information how they see fit.

As for flags, I am beginning to see that although I am used to using flags with multiple values, the effect can be achieved fairly easily with queries and then custom flags can be added to the Records View. Its not the same but the results are.

image.png (41.22 KiB) Viewed 841 times

[tatewise]

The Family Historian community seems to be committed to not using witnesses, when I see them as the only sensible way to record a household event such as a census. How else can you record that "Joe was recorded in the census living with his grandfather Joe snr"

Many of the FH users have been using it for decades, starting before Fact Witnesses were introduced.
Then the only option was a Census Event against each household member and for consistency those users continue to prefer that method, especially if not interested in Narrative Report automated sentences. However, it is still possible to record that "Joe was recorded in the census living with his grandfather Joe snr". The associated Source Citation holds that information in the Text From Source, and if necessary the Fact narrative Sentence can be manually edited to say whatever is needed.

More recent FH users often do use Fact Witnesses for Census household members, especially if they are interested in Narrative Report automated sentences.

See Recording from a Census Record that explains the pros & cons of the two methods but since FH V7 updated Reports and Plugins the Fact Witnesses option has fewer cons.

[Jean001]

I came to FH from TMG several years after TMG was no longer being supported and, alas, in those days FH did not have Fact Witnesses so I used the FH plugin, Give Witnesses their Own Facts. to convert the TMG Fact Witnesses. Now that is unnecessary.

I started to use Witnesses in FH early last year and I continue to give each person their own Census Fact. I have created a custom Witness Role for a child listed amongst a grandparent's household, the parents being the Witnesses. I am not a user of narrative reports but I do like to see such instances listed in the Property Box Facts Tab.

FH is not restrictive in how it is used. I am sure that in certain instances I follow my own way of working rather than the norm but it works fine. It may take a little while to find out how FH works and to feel comfortable using it. I did 'miss' TMG when I changed over. I had tried other software before I changed but none suited me as much as FH.

[ColeValleyGirl]

FH is not restrictive in how it is used. I am sure that in certain instances I follow my own way of working rather than the norm but it works fine.

FH is so flexible, I'm not sure there is a 'norm' any more.

'Old hands' have certain ways of doing things but that doesn't mean that we're right

I'm not personally a fan of witnesses, except in certain limited circumstances ('real' witnesses such as the witnesses to a will or a marriage), but I don't use narrative reports and I don't necessarily want to redo a couple of decades of data entry. If I was starting from scratch, I might think differently, although I still wouldn't use narrative reports, so the answer might be the same for me

[arthurk]

I've never used TMG, so I can't comment on that aspect of the question. However, I remember that many years ago, probably in the software I used before FH but I'm not totally sure of this, a child who was made a 'witness' in a parent's census fact didn't have their own census fact, so any reports for the child wouldn't include that census. This was such a major drawback that I've always given children their own census facts.

At that stage I was lumping census sources rather than splitting them. Rather than transcribing the entries I included in each census fact note a brief summary of the entry, and if a child was somewhere other than the parental home I would mention it there. For example, one of my notes reads "Age 10, born Leeds. Scholar. In household of his uncle George Craven." (In this case the lad's mother's census note records his whereabouts too, and the uncle's refers to the situation as well.)

Since I've started splitting census sources and including transcriptions, I'm still writing this kind of note for consistency, even though it may be superfluous, but it means it can be easily seen in the property box without opening the source window.

[NickWalker]

I'd expect over the next few years that family history software will plug in to large language models such as Chat GPT to generate narrative reports. Chat GPT etc. can already take in GEDCOM or existing narrative reports and create coherent, non-repetitive sentences. They should easily be able to add descriptions of others recorded as being in the same residence at the time simply by looking at the source citations without needing to use witness roles. But equally it should be able to interpret those who have used witness roles.

Personally, I don't like the duplication of having people in a census entry linked together by citations to a source AND using witness roles too. There is always a danger of inconsistency (e.g. the citations indicate 5 people in the household, the witness roles show 4) and this can then be difficult to resolve.

[sleepingwolf]

Its funny how these issues go round in circles. I was a long time TMG user starting with version 3. Until version 5 TMG did not support roles/witnesses and we entered census data with one event tag per person as is common in FH. It was refugees from Ultimate Family Tree which stopped being supported in 2000 who pressured TMG to add roles. UFT's unique selling point was the quality of its narrative reports which relied heavily on the use of roles and its users struggled to get TMG to produce the kind of reports they were used to. It was some time before most users linked household members to a single census event tag and that was largely because it significantly cut down the data entry time. The standard census roles in TMG do not create particularly inspired narrative sentences and you would have to significantly customise them to get a sentence like "He was recorded in the household of his grandfather."