* FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Questions regarding use of any Version of Family Historian. Please ensure you have set your Version of Family Historian in your Profile
Post Reply
User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 21 Nov 2015 19:40

Various online location, including personal 100K person genealogy site, http://chesebro.net, The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding (TNG), RootsWeb, MyHeritage, Ancestry, LDS FamilySearch, WIKI Tree, GeneaNet process my GEDCOMS BEFORE FH6 without problems.

I use a custom desktop computer with Win 7 Pro and 8 MB RAM

MY FH6 Problem 2 (tech support reference number #500181 referred me to FHUG before they would help )

FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application but do in online locations mentioned above.
Long values can be broken into shorter GEDCOM lines by using a subordinate CONC. The CONC tag assumes that the accompanying subordinate value is concatenated to the previous line value without saving the carriage return prior to the line terminator.

One example of thousands in problematic longer Notes:

FH6 GEDCOM entry for Retirement fact:
1 RETI
2 DATE 4 MAY 1992
2 PLAC Lake St Louis, St Charles County, MO
2 NOTE 36 years' service with Lucent Technologies (formerly Western Electric
2 CONC Company and AT&T Network Systems)

FH6 Property Facts - Fact is listed without all the text – text of the CONC line is missing
Note: 36 years' service with Lucent Technologies (formerly Western Electric

FH6 Individual Records - Fact is listed as follows with the complete Note text completed in the CONC line:
+ Retirement
*Date 4 May 1992
*Place Lake St Louis, St Charles County, MO
*Note 36 years service with Lucent Technologies (formerly Western Electric
*CONC Company and AT&T Network Systems)

FH6 GEDCOM processes correctly on personal site with TNG:
http://chesebro.net/tng/getperson.php?p ... e=Complete
Retirement 4 May 1992 Lake St Louis, St Charles County, MO
• 36 years' service with Lucent Technologies (formerly Western ElectricCompany and At&T Network Systems)

Is there a plug-in to correct this problem and if not is there help to develop a plug-in to correct this problem?
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 21 Nov 2015 20:38

Larry, this has some similarity to Custom Fact does not fully process (13038).

You quote the GEDCOM specification Page 10: "Long values can be broken into shorter GEDCOM lines by using a subordinate CONC. ..." and a significant word is subordinate which means the CONC tag must be at a greater level number than the superior tag.
i.e.
2 NOTE 36 years' service with Lucent Technologies (formerly Western Electric
3 CONC Company and AT&T Network Systems)

That is why FH V6 shows the 2 CONC as a UDF.

The CONC also violates another part of the GEDCOM specification on Page 71: "Values that are split for a CONC tag must always be split at a non-space. If the value is split on a space the space will be lost when concatenation takes place."
So it should be:
2 NOTE 36 years' service with Lucent Technologies (formerly Western Electri
3 CONC c Company and AT&T Network Systems)

Having investigated many genealogy products over the years, I do not recall those GEDCOM CONC errors arising before, and I am surprised all the products you list handle that erroneous structure correctly. What product is producing that faulty GEDCOM CONC tag?

A Plugin could be written to make the necessary level number correction, but correcting the non-space split is much more difficult. If there are not too many then a plain text edit of the GEDCOM file could correct the errors quite quickly.

Can the fault be reported to the developers of the product that is producing the faulty GEDCOM?

BTW: I dispute that all the products you quote handle that 2 CONC tag, because Ancestry for one does not. It truncates the NOTE at ...(formerly Western Electric and discards the CONC text. If the CONC tag is corrected as above, then Ancestry discards the entire NOTE and CONC text.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 22 Nov 2015 14:40

The ATTACHMENTS Fix UDF CONC or CONT Text Plugin Version 0.1 Dated 22 Nov 2015 often does a good job of fixing the UDF CONC (and CONT) tags, but there are a couple caveats:
  • If there is more than one candidate long-text field (NOTE, ADDR, TEXT, etc) then the wrong one may be chosen.
  • If there is more than one UDF CONC/CONT tag together then their text may be constructed in the wrong order.
A different technique operating directly on the GEDCOM file may offer a better solution, but is more difficult to design.

Click the ATTACHMENTS link to install Plugin into FH.

It is advisable to use File > Backup/Restore > Small Backup before running Plugin just in case!
Alternatively, run the Plugin on a copy of your Project.

To cancel all changes use Undo > Plugin Updates after running Plugin but before closing FH.

[ ATTACHMENT DELETED as superseded by later version ]
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 23 Nov 2015 22:50

Mike,

The farther I go the more behind I get :(

1st, the CONC plug-in locks-up FH6!

I tried it on a small, non-FH6 GEDCOM and, as expected, it ran and found no UDF files. I opened the same GEDCOM in FH6, compiled an UDF report of about 75 records, tried the plug-in again and again the FH6 app locked-up.

2nd, FH6 GEDCOM upload to WorldConnect (RootsWeb) fails! (Should I do a "Problem 3" ?)

I tried to update my WorldConnect RootsWeb location with both a FH6 GEDCOM and a Zipped FH6 GEDCOM but failed with this error message:

"Error gedcom does not start with 0 HEAD: level="

Now, with all the extra entries in the FG6 GEDCOM compared to a FTM GEDCOM, what is the problem? And, there is what appears to be a "O HEAD" included in the following 1st lines of the GEDCOM:

0 HEAD
1 SOUR FAMILY_HISTORIAN
2 VERS 6.0
2 NAME Family Historian
2 CORP Calico Pie Limited
1 FILE D:\FH v6\Chesebro\Chesebro.fh_data\Chesebro.ged
1 GEDC
2 VERS 5.5
2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED
1 CHAR UNICODE
1 DEST GED55

as compared to the FTM GEDCOM:

0 HEAD
1 SOUR FTW
2 VERS Family Tree Maker (16.0.350)
2 NAME Family Tree Maker for Windows
2 CORP MyFamily.com, Inc.
3 ADDR 360 W 4800 N
4 CONT Provo, UT 84604
3 PHON (801) 705-7000
1 DEST FTM
1 DATE 16 FEB 2012
1 CHAR ANSI

HELP!
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 23 Nov 2015 23:06

Sorry about the Plugin, that sort of thing does happen with a brand new plugin due to some unforeseen circumstances. Would you be prepared to send me the GEDCOM so I can investigate?

As mentioned in Custom Fact does not fully process (13038) WorldConnect (RootsWeb) is a product that does not recognise Unicode UTF-16, so use the Export Gedcom File Plugin with the (RWW) RootsWeb WorldConnect option.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 24 Nov 2015 00:26

Too big to attach here - limited to 256kb. File has almost 100k persons. Download the Zip file from http://chesebro.net/download.shtml and let me know when you do so I can delete it from online.
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 24 Nov 2015 13:09

I have successfully downloaded your Chesebro GEDCOM, created a Project, and run some tests.

I must say there are many more than 75 UDF records, so not sure this is the same GEDCOM as you talked about on Mon Nov 23. It has over 4,500 UDF.

However, I did find some UDF upset the Plugin so there is a revised ATTACHMENT below.

[ ATTACHMENT DELETED as superseded by later version ]
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 24 Nov 2015 14:10

As I mentioned earlier, the plug-in froze in my main GEDCOM and then, considering size might have been the problem, I tried it a 2nd time on the smaller file with only 76 UDF entries. You now can understand why I am so concerned about my data problems since I am committed to FH6. I did not loose data with FTM although there were many formatting of the data problems that I had been working on to correct. Now I have to save the data!

Thanks for the updated file.
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 24 Nov 2015 14:34

Sorry Larry, but you never mentioned earlier anything about size being the problem and substituting a small file.

I am mystified about how that Chesebro GEDCOM was derived, because it has an unusual mixture of FH specific tags such as Custom Attribute (_ATTR), Sentence Template (_SENT), and Child Pedigree (_PEDI) plus many UDF tags that must come from elsewhere.

My revised Plugin does not even fix all the CONC/CONT UDF because some are in a very strange and invalid position.
They appear to be related to the Custom Attributes, but repeat the text that is already attached to the _ATTR tag.

An explanation of how that GEDCOM was derived might throw some light on the odd structures it contains.

The solution to the problem of losing data is backups.
Knowledge Base > Key Features for Newcomers includes the topic Knowledge Base > Backup and Recovery that not only discusses FH specific backup options, but also general backup regimes for everything in your Documents folder, etc, in case of disk/PC failure.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 27 Nov 2015 19:01

I've been working the CONC problem after your update with good success which I will mention later.

1st, I will try to be more specific to help you understand my actions as I did try to explain the "smaller gedcom" effort before you updated your plug-in with this:

"1st, the CONC plug-in locks-up FH6!

I tried it on a small, non-FH6 GEDCOM and, as expected, it ran and found no UDF files. I opened the same GEDCOM in FH6, compiled an UDF report of about 75 records, tried the plug-in again and again the FH6 app locked-up".

The GEDCOM I share with you was the GEDCOM FH6 uses when I open the FH6 application. I began FH6 with a GEDCOM from FTM, FH6 used it to create the file I now use in FH6.

I have re-run the UDF process for a 15% - 20% reduction from the original report to the new report. However, I see remaining UDF items but they are not problems in FH6 individual properties or reports. These are my individual remaining UDFS:
  • Fact, Magna Charta Sureties, 2 CONC lines
    Fact, Magna Charta mentionalbes, 1 CONC line
    Fact, Mayflower, 1 CONC line
    Fact, Occupation, 3 CONC lines (2nd Occupation OK)
    ADDR
    PHON
    EMAIL
I do not know but I do guess that there are many other individual remaining UDFs that apparently FH6, and hopefully my various online locations, process completely.

My 1st question is: Why are fully processed CONC lines shown as UDFs?

My 2nd question is: How do I manage, i.e. correct, change or eliminate as UDFs, the ADDR, PHON, EMAIL UDFs?

Finally, you did not respond to:
  • "Error gedcom does not start with 0 HEAD: level="

    Now, with all the extra entries in the FG6 GEDCOM compared to a FTM GEDCOM, what is the problem? And, there is what appears to be a "O HEAD" included in the following 1st lines of the GEDCOM:

    0 HEAD
    1 SOUR FAMILY_HISTORIAN
    2 VERS 6.0
    2 NAME Family Historian
    2 CORP Calico Pie Limited
    1 FILE D:\FH v6\Chesebro\Chesebro.fh_data\Chesebro.ged
    1 GEDC
    2 VERS 5.5
    2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED
    1 CHAR UNICODE
    1 DEST GED55

    as compared to the FTM GEDCOM:

    0 HEAD
    1 SOUR FTW
    2 VERS Family Tree Maker (16.0.350)
    2 NAME Family Tree Maker for Windows
    2 CORP MyFamily.com, Inc.
    3 ADDR 360 W 4800 N
    4 CONT Provo, UT 84604
    3 PHON (801) 705-7000
    1 DEST FTM
    1 DATE 16 FEB 2012
    1 CHAR ANSI
So please disregard my request for GEDCOM not accepted at RootsWeb World Connect as I will post a separate request.

Thanks,

Larry
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 27 Nov 2015 19:35

Knowledge Base > Handling Unrecognised Data Fields gives general advice on fixing UDF.

I will review the GEDCOM you sent, and answer in more detail later.

1st question: Without knowing the changes you have carried out in FH V6 after importing from FTM, it is difficult to explain all of the current problems.

I did answer your 2nd question on Mon Nov 23:
As mentioned in Custom Fact does not fully process (13038) WorldConnect (RootsWeb) is a product that does not recognise Unicode UTF-16, so use the Export Gedcom File Plugin with the (RWW) RootsWeb WorldConnect option.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 27 Nov 2015 20:35

Thanks Mike - I missed your response re GEDCOM processing at RootsWeb - please accept my apology for saying I did not get a response.

I am at a loss why the changes in the GEDCOM after being imported to FH6 from FTM are now a problem explaining why good CONC lines remain in the UDF report. Other than moving note text from Places locations and similar corrections, and modifying some of the elements of different Facts, e.g. adding {notes} or doing global Search and Replace for misspelling or other text errors, all changes are being made in FH6 application options and/or Plug-ins.

The magnitude of existing UDFs appears to be CONC lines that do not effect the FH6 properties and/or reports, e.g. Narrative Notes.
  • How do I do, globally, change or modify UDF CONC lines so they are not reported as UDFs or remove them if they are not problems within FH6 or a GEDCOM produced by FH6 used to update my online RootsWeb, TNG and Ancestry files.

And,
  • 1) why are the ADDR, PHON and EMAIL items UDFs and

    (2) how do I manage them, e.g. how do I access them to correct or even determine possible options?


Thanks again,

Larry
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 28 Nov 2015 17:49

Larry, I have investigated the Chesebro Gedcom that you sent to me.

There are essentially three significant causes of the various UDF:
  1. Ancestry tags that are invalid Gedcom custom facts, created via their Add Fact list using Address (ADDR), Degree (_DEG), Elected (_ELEC), Email (EMAIL), Funeral (_FUN), Medical (_MDCL), Namesake (_NAMS), Phone (PHON), and Separation (_SEPR).
  2. Ancestry Source Citation Footnotes (_FOOT) not recognised by FH.
  3. Ancestry invalid use of CONC tag.
Those UDF should be fixed in that order, and following the instructions below carefully:
  1. Create a Custom Individual Attribute (NOT Event) in FH for each of the Individual facts Address, Degree, Elected, Email, Funeral, Medical, Namesake, Phone similar to the fix for Military (_MILT). Then similarly use Change Any Fact Tag to convert each <UDF Tag> (except CONC) to its matching Custom fact.
  2. Create a Custom Family Event (NOT Individual) in FH for the Family fact Separation and use Change Any Fact Tag on its Family Records tab to convert the <UDF Tag> of _SEPR to Custom fact Separation.
  3. The easiest way to fix the _FOOT tag is to use a plain text editor such as the Windows Programs > Accessories > WordPad to open ...\Family Historian Projects\Chesebro\Chesebro.fh_data\Chesebro.ged and use Edit > Replace, Find what: _FOOT, Replace with: NOTE, tick Match whole word only and Match case, then Replace All, and when finished Save.
  4. Finally run the ATTACHMENTS revised Fix UDF CONC or CONT Text Plugin Version 0.3 Dated 28 Nov 2015 below, which should fix most of the CONC tag problems.
[ ATTACHMENT DELETED as superseded by Import From Ancestry or FTM Plugin in Knowledge Base > Import from Family Tree Maker (FTM) Quick Fix Plugins ]

Now run the UDF List Plugin to see what UDF remain, and I can explain how to fix them.

The ADDR and PHON tags are UDF because they are being used in an invalid Gedcom level 1 position, as if they are Facts. Those tags are only valid as subsidiary tags at lower level 2 within Facts. The EMAIL tag is NOT a valid Gedcom tag.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 28 Nov 2015 20:22

There is only one existing Fact similar to the ones you mentioned - Elected or appointed and it does not appear in the UDF report for the 1st few individuals I knew had the fact and it appears to process correctly in FH6 properties.

The FH6 GEDCOM does contain 3 of the Facts you mentioned and they do appear in the UDF report.

I did make new Facts for the three in the GEDCOM but cannot run the plug-in because they are not FH6 Facts. My results:
  • New Attribute Fact................... Old Fact (only in GED*)
    Address, new fact................... *ADDR
    Degree
    Elected................................... Elected or appointed**
    Email...................................... *EMAIL
    Funeral
    Medical
    Namesake
    Phone..................................... *PHON

    **Did not change because it is not a problem
I did nothing more until I know what to do with the 3 Facts known to be causing UDF entries.

BTW, do you reference "Ancestry" meaning FTM? FYI, my GEDCOMS were originally produced prior to Ancestry with FTM v16 (2007) where I kept my main file then interchanged with FTM 2008-2014 depending on different tests and a few PDF charts or reports that v16 could not produce - all data entries were in v16 and then it's GEDCOM opened by 2008-2014. So, I believe the origin of my GEDCOM oddities comes from FTM exclusively.
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 28 Nov 2015 22:00

Larry, the Chesebro Gedcom that you sent to me DOES contain multiple instances of all 9 of those UDF 'Facts' that I listed.
Are you saying you have corrected them yourself?
Or have you got confused with several different copies of Gedcom?
It is going to be difficult to help you if I am not working with the same Gedcom as you.
The Gedcom you sent has 94957 Individuals and 36080 Families.

I do not have a copy of FTM, but I suspect it has the same oddities as Ancestry, because the two are so closely aligned, and you say Ancestry fully supports your Gedcom.

In Change Any Fact Tag the Target Tag Set must be Custom (NOT Standard) because you added Address, Email & Phone as Custom facts.

BTW: I hope you used Tools > Fact Types > New to create the new FH V6 Facts.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 29 Nov 2015 21:48

I re-searched the GEDCOM with same results but tried the plug-in again although I had specified the correct options I failed to click the open space for the UDF tags! Doing so opened the list of tags I could not find. Also by doing so, I learned the spelling for the GEDCOM entries which were quite different from the variations I used.

So, I made about 100 corrections for the identified facts. I had a problem with the _ELECT fact not having the text. I had to go to my TNG online file to copy it. I did not check to see if it is similar to other CONC problems where the CONC lines were shown as UDF but actually processed OK both in FH6 and online!

I was unable to complete the Separation step. An existing "Separation" fact and not UDF _SEPR fact was found in any of the categories much less "Family".

I ran your updated CONC/CONT plug-in and I am quite confused with the result. The initial result page had more UDFs than the last UDF Named List. The great majority of the initial individual items were Source records. The others were extended notes but strangely each were repeated.

Should the UDF Named List be updated or do I have to do something to replace it after re-running the plug-in which I want to do anyway just to print to file or save the list.

Thanks for bearing with me as I try to save my records and begin to use FH6. You have been a great help and I really appreciate it.
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 29 Nov 2015 23:05

GEDCOM tags are usually diferent from the names displayed to users.
e.g. _MILT tag is the Military name.

The _SEPR tag and Separation name is on the Family Records tab at top of the Change Any Fact Tag Plugin, as I made very clear in step 2. previously.

The CONC/CONT repeats are because there are often multiple CONC lines per tag that needs updating.

BTW: Did you forget to perform step 3. to correct the _FOOT problem?

It sounds like you have been using the Tools > Find Uncategorised Data command (NOT a Plugin), and produces a Named List of Records that may each contain many UDF tags, so the Named List will be comparatively short and does not tell you exactly where the UDF tags are. Yes, that command must be run again to update the Named List.

You should have run the UDF List Plugin as mentioned later in Knowledge Base > Handling Unrecognised Data Fields to get a list of every single UDF tag.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 30 Nov 2015 05:47

Looks like it's a good thing the UDF problem appears to be solved as it appears your patience has drawn thin - but I do thank you and appreciate your help as I have tried to express previously.

Of course I understood clearly and tried hard to follow your instructions. I did clearly state previously that I "did not find in any of the categories much less 'Family'" the "UDF _SEPR". But, my bad of course, when I again checked, I found it and finished that effort.

And, clearly, I understand the difference between the individual line output of the plug-in and the UDF Named List as I had stated previously that the plug-in result "initial result page had more UDFs than the last UDF Named List". My assumption was that the entries in the plug-in result page should correspond to the UDF Name List entries even though the UDF entries were compacted in each Record ID.

I believe you know that the UDF Named List entries, contrary to "does not tell you exactly where the UDF tags are", actually do identify the tag if you expand each entry, even into the associated Family and Source tags where the special star like icon identifies the UDF. I am learning, with your guidance ;)

And, I did not forget the simple yet effective find and replace Notepad exercise on the GEDCOM for the _FOOT problem.

The re-run UDF list was empty! :-)

THANKS!

Larry Chesebro'
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 30 Nov 2015 08:32

Excellent!!!
I hope you enjoy using FH in the future.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 01 Dec 2015 00:23

I am looking forward to being able to save all my data and use FH6 even better than FTM. I continue to find missing data but with old files able to correct FH6 as I also correct carry-over errors, but not missing data, from early FTM input errors.

I have 2 databases for my family history effort. The main database is the "Chesebro" we have been working with. The 2nd is "Incomplete Lineage" AKA as my "Orphans" database because it contains probable descendants or relatives of William Chesebrough, my 1630 immigrant ancestor from Boston, Lincolnshire but who I have yet to connect to William.

I tried all the processes used on Chesebro to correct UDFs in Incomplete - successful for all but 7. I now ask you for help on these reported in the UDF Named File but not corrected with the CONC or Fact Change plug-ins:

(1) 2 UDFs in different Record IDs
Child
* ADOP
Originally there was no Adoption Fact for these 2 IDs. I added the Adoption Fact, saved the project, and replaced the UDF File but the problems remained

(2) 1 UDF
Occupation
* CONC
The line had an "r" disconnected from an Occupation Note text entry
CONC plug-in did not correct.
I corrected the Occupation Note text entry, saved the project, and re-ran CONC again but unsuccessfully

(3) 2 UDFs in different Record IDs
Birth
* CONC
The line in both records had a "/" disconnected from a Birth Note text entry
CONC plug-in did not correct
I corrected the Birth Note text entry, saved the project, and re-ran CONC again but unsuccessfully

(4) 1 UDF
Adoption (different from IDs above)
Place
* CONC
The line had extensive text that was disconnected from the Adoption Fact Note AND the note was missing even more text from the original FTM GEDCOM
CONC plug-in did not correct
I corrected the Adoption Note text entry, saved the project, and re-ran CONC again but unsuccessfully

(5) 1 UDF
Address
* PHON
I cannot relate this to the Chesebro Fact Changing plug-in action. That plug-in only has a Submitter <Defined Tags> Source Tag Name "Address" as does the Target Tag Set but I am not sure how to keep the PHON part of Address.

For all 7 UDF entries in the UDF Named List which I re-ran after each effort above, I find no UDF tags listed in the 4 different Source Tag Sets of the Fact Change plug-in Individual Records, Family Records, and Other Records

Again, your help would be greatly appreciated,

Larry Chesebro'
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 01 Dec 2015 12:40

Items (1) to (4):
Making changes manually will have no effect on the UDF themselves.
As it says in Knowledge Base > Handling Unrecognised Data Fields:
Manually copy the values to valid fields and delete the UDF.
So those UDF you have corrected manually can now be deleted.
In the Named List select the * ADOP or * CONC UDF tag and hit the Delete key on your keyboard.

Item (5):
I suggest you open the Property Box for the Individual with the Address + * PHON UDF.
On the Facts tab use Add Fact to create a Phone fact and enter the phone number.
Now you can delete the * PHONE UDF tag as above.

BTW:
The Fix UDF CONC or CONT Text Plugin does not yet cater for all possible FTM misuses of the CONC tag, but in future I hope to add the cases you mention in (2) to (4).
The Change Any Fact Tag Plugin does not cope with all UDF. It only deals with Fact and other level 1 tags. Those are the ones added as Facts in FTM. None of your items (1) to (5) are level 1 Facts.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 05 Dec 2015 00:24

I solved all the UDF problems in my Incomplete database.

The 'delete' function you recommended "In the Named List select the * ADOP or * CONC UDF tag and hit the Delete key on your keyboard" did not work for me - or by selecting the "X" ("Cut") keyboard key. However, I was able to delete the tags in the person's Individual Properties "All" folder.
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
LarryC
Platinum
Posts: 40
Joined: 27 Oct 2015 21:43
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Lake St Louis, MO, USA
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by LarryC » 05 Dec 2015 00:27

I have determined I need more help as I continue making FH6 workable for me. Should I continue with my requests on the thread or start new ones for each new requests?
  • Larry Chesebro'
Image

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16466
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: FH6 GEDCOM CONC lines not processed in FH6 application

Post by tatewise » 05 Dec 2015 11:53

You are correct, a Named List does not appear to allow field deletion!

Yes, it is probably best to start a new thread for significantly new types of corrective action.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

Post Reply