* Location box required

[jsphillips]

I know this should be in the Wish List but I think some discussion is required first.
In our modern technological society surely our researchers and data creators should be able to insert into our Genealogical programs the exact location of places by using map coordinates ?
I notice that FT Analyzer has gone a little way forward in using addresses to pinpoint map locations obtained from the GEDCOM files.

[tatewise]

It is already in the Wish List at Ref 8 Attaching multimedia to a Place incorporating Ref 249 Ability to save information against places.

At a very simplistic level there is nothing to stop Grid co-ordinates being included in the Address or Place field along with Post Code, etc.
These can be managed via Tools > Work with Data to keep them synchronised.

There also is a slightly unconventional way of recording such Location details already:
how_to:create_locations_database_details|> Create a Locations Database of Place & Address Details.

It is a little awkward to understand at first, but I use it, and it works quite well.

[AdrianBruce]

Slightly tongue in cheek, but also not.... It does seem to me that map coordinates are in danger of being a solution looking for a problem.

It depends on what you want to use them for. If you simply want to put a dot on a map, then they are fine. The opportunity to record positions of graves in a large cemetery sounds invaluable.

But if you believe that they are a means of getting round changes of county, etc, over the years, by coming up with a coordinates value that doesn't change over the years, then you could come unstuck. Coordinates are great for defining a point (e.g. a grave) - but they fail when defining an area. What, for example, are the co-ordinates for London? Well, you could give the coordinates of every corner of the outline-map of London... no, perhaps not. Saying it's the coordinates plus x kilometres in a circle round (a point plus tolerance) fails totally if you've got a long thin parish (say), when your circle would cover not just the parish but a substantial area outside. (To take another example - a circle of tolerance around the coordinates of St. Pancras Station needs to go some distance to the north and south to include all of the station - that distance would overlap onto Kings Cross Station. And yes, that was an example from my professional life).

There is a serious point here - before coding in a representation of coordinates, it's a good idea to think how you intend to use them.

[jsphillips]

Thanks both of you
Understood all points
I just wanted to see a Box fact set up for "Coordinates"
Obviously this could mean Post Codes, map references , GPS etc.
It is obvious that London by itself could not have a coordinate But a reference per say:-
51Degrees 17 22 N 0 degrees 18 21 E would be able to pinpoint an exact place.
I have found that often a road or hamlet stated can not be found by FT Analyzer for example.
It would be nice to go out and "pinpoint a location if if the original place is no longer in existence.

[jsphillips]

Is there also any news of a new version with perhaps some of the Wish list included ??

[tatewise]

I am not quite sure about the thinking behind your idea of a Box fact for Coordinates.

I presume you mean a Coordinates field associated with the Address & Place fields of every Fact, where you can record details to pinpoint the location.

If so, then you can go some way towards that with FH as it stands.
As I said before, you can record such details in the Address field already, and manage those details using Tools > Work with Data > Addresses to ensure the same coordinates appear in all copies of the same Address.

If you want a separate field, then every Address field has a set of subordinate fields: 1st Line, 2nd Line, City, State, Postcode, Country.
These are created via the All tab or the Records Window by a right-click on any Address field.
You could use the Postcode field to hold the coordinates.

They can all easily be displayed in Diagrams, Reports, and Queries, and even added to the Property Box but only on a customised tab and only for a chosen subset of Facts.

[jsphillips]

Thanks Mike
I will try those suggestions you have made

Is there any indications from Calico on wish list or new update ?
Perhaps Jane could reply.
Best regards and thanks again

[Jane]

Calico are always very cagey about what they are adding to newer versions of Family Historian, so they won't make any sort of announcement prior to the formal one, and before you ask, I can not comment on what I think will be in there.

[jsphillips]

thanks Jane
Fingers crossed to be soon and with all the top items in wish list

[ambisset]

It may be of use to note that the GEDCOM 5.5.1 standard has added a MAP tag to the PLACE_STRUCTURE

Code: Select all

PLACE_STRUCTURE:=
n PLAC <PLACE_NAME> {1:1} p.58
+1 FORM <PLACE_HIERARCHY> {0:1} p.58
+1 FONE <PLACE_PHONETIC_VARIATION> {0:M} p.59
+2 TYPE <PHONETIC_TYPE> {1:1} p.57
+1 ROMN <PLACE_ROMANIZED_VARIATION> {0:M} p.59
+2 TYPE <ROMANIZED_TYPE> {1:1} p.61
+1 MAP {0:1}
+2 LATI <PLACE_LATITUDE> {1:1} p.58
+2 LONG <PLACE_LONGITUDE> {1:1} p.58
+1 <<NOTE_STRUCTURE>> {0:M} p.37

So however it is displayed in the FH program it would have a direct one to one place to store the fact in the GEDCOM. Since FH is the best program for adherence to GEDCOM standard the existence of this tag in the standard should make such a request for update a realistic proposition.

[AdrianBruce]

Except, of course, it isn't a standard - only a draft, which I'm sure I've seen different, err, drafts of. The version I have is actually quite poor because it's missing lots of explanations about new, updated and removed tags, so whether the tag content is consistent is unknown.

Having said all that, many companies have implemented 5.5.1 and at the very least using 5.5.1 tags in their intended spot but with an underscore to make them custom tags by the 5.5 standard would seem a sensible option.

[ambisset]

A sensible compromise. If only GEDCOMX would actually get off the ground we could stop using an ancient restrictive text format and use one that has been updated for more modern technologies and would better cope with these sorts of mapping requirements and other advances in data handling.

As has been pointed out in the thread LATI/LONG isn't really sufficient to give a suitable map point. You really need a bounding box too. With a bounding box you can have a point in the centre of Australia but a bounding box covering the whole of Australia means when the map is displayed its zoomed out so you see all of Australia.

With just the single point you don't know if you are meaning the farm that happens to be spot on that location or the entire country. Only a bounding box that gives you the zoom factor really works. NB. A zoom factor on its own isn't usually sufficient as you have to then specify the scale of the map.

So for the example in the thread London isn't just "51Degrees 17 22 N 0 degrees 18 21 E" it is that point with a bounding box zoomed out to cover all of London.

@jsphillips note FTAnalyzer allows you edit any locations that Google failed to find, typically these are the more precise locations. You can then move the point and the bounding box (zoom level) and it will remember that for the future.

The OS also was at GeoBusiness 2014 yesterday demonstrating a new product a OS Gazetteer of Great Britain – consisting of settlement names, road names and numbers and postcodes and their locations. This is planned to be available under the OS OpenData licence which means I should be able to incorporate geo-coding based on this OS Gazetter as an option in addition to using Google.

You can also use FTAnalyzer to view your locations on new or old maps or indeed on any geo-referenced map you load into your mapping directory. So for instance I have scanned my purchased copy of maps of the 1896 OS range for NE Scotland and use them in when pinpointing locations. Naturally I cannot distribute these maps for others to use as I don't hold the copyright, however for my own use its fine.

I'm working on writing a mapping guide and I plan on including instructions on how you can add these types of scanned/downloaded custom maps for yourself. Although there are already some instructions at http://ftanalyzer.codeplex.com/wikipage ... tom%20Maps

[jsphillips]

Great news
but miracles always seem to take forever.
I have specific locations from the various census's some of which will not geocode anyway !!
Thanks all for a great discussion