Publishing report

Johnr65 · Post by **Johnr65** » 12 Dec 2020 11:58

When I enter a source/citation such as a birth, I enter in the note, the volume and page number of the GRO record or fhl number if for FSO. However, when I see the preview of the published report the numbers are not shown only the GRO or FSO text? Is there a way around this as people reading a report would like to check/copy these numbers?

Post by **tatewise** » 12 Dec 2020 12:13

The options for displaying Source Citations in Reports have been extended and rearranged.

See Tools > Preferences > Sources and click the Generic Source Formats... button.
There you can choose globally what to include/exclude for every type of Report.
Under Citation Details you need to tick Notes.

Alternatively, in the open Report use the Report > Options > Sources tab under Append from Citation tick Notes.

Review the other settings in those dialogues to become familiar with what they now do for you. Don't forget the Help button.

BTW:
It is more conventional to put such references in the Where Within Source field which is enabled by default for that reason.

Johnr65 · Post by **Johnr65** » 12 Dec 2020 12:27

Thank you, Mike, that worked and I tried 'where within source' but it only shows 'volume' and not 'page' as it seems unable to paste the 2 lines that I copied?

Post by **tatewise** » 12 Dec 2020 12:32

Yes, Where Within Source is a one line box so you must be a bit more ingenious to get both Volume & Page on one line.
e.g.
Paste in the Note box temporarily, delete the newline so all on one line, then cut & paste into Where Within Source.
Alternatively, some users prefer the Text From Source box that is multiline although for a slightly different purpose.

Johnr65 · Post by **Johnr65** » 12 Dec 2020 12:35

Yes, Mike, I seem to remember having that same problem with FH6 that is why I used the note box. Pity CP didn't fix that.

E Wilcock · Post by **E Wilcock** » 12 Dec 2020 12:43

Agreed, it is maddening having to paste reference in the note field, re edit to a singe line and then paste it into the correct field. Why didnt Calico Pie fix this?
I am old and vague and using version 7 because I believe in supporting genealogy software designers. But I am not sure what advantages it brings.

Post by **tatewise** » 12 Dec 2020 12:55

In their defence, it is not entirely the fault of CP.
The GEDCOM specification they (and other products) work to defines Where Within Source as a short text one line field.
However, CP could have designed it such that multiline pasted text has each newline replaced by space so it becomes one line.

I suggest you report that idea to Calico Pie via http://www.calico-pie.com/osticket/open.php.
Have you ever reported the problem to them during FH V6?
If not then how do you expect it to get fixed? They are not mind-readers

brianlummis · Post by **brianlummis** » 12 Dec 2020 15:04

BTW:It is more conventional to put such references in the Where Within Source field which is enabled by default for that reason.

I have always thought this to be wrong! The source is the GRO Index and, if that is how you describe the source, then Where Within Source should be "Birth", "Marriage" or "Death", unless you have those as 3 individual sources, as that is where you need to look within the GRO Index. The Text From Source is what is written in the Index i.e. The person's name (it could be a different spelling to what you have recorded in FH), the Registration District, the volume and the page for the earlier indexes and whatever is recorded for the later indexes.

Or have I misunderstood something?

Post by **tatewise** » 12 Dec 2020 15:55

If you have a 'lumped' Method 2 Source record for ALL GRO Birth Indexes where do you record the Volume & Page, etc?
The Family Historian Sample Project that has 3 such Source records for GRO Birth Index, GRO Death Index & GRO Marriage Index. Review their associated Citations (using Where Used Record Links plugin) and each has Where Within Source details. The Text From Source could contain the entry found in the GRO Index page which is the Name of the person and the District, Volume & Page. So in such cases, it is not unreasonable to use either Citation field.

brianlummis · Post by **brianlummis** » 12 Dec 2020 17:16

Having just looked at the Sample Project, it does not seem to have different GRO sources in FH7. It now lumps the 3 that you mention into "INDEX General Register Office BMD" and places all the details into the Text from Source tab. The Where Within item is left blank. It could be argued that "Birth", "Death" or "Marriage" could be placed in either Where Within or Text from Source so I would be quite happy to leave it as in the suggested FH7 form.

Brian

Post by **tatewise** » 12 Dec 2020 17:26

I am still working from the V7 beta which has the three GRO Indexes but the principle is the same.

brianlummis · Post by **brianlummis** » 12 Dec 2020 17:29

Ther is a completely new Sample Project in FH7 - I am afraid that the Munros are no longer with us

Post by **LornaCraig** » 12 Dec 2020 17:38

Well the Munros are still with me!!
And the sample project still has three separate (generic) sources for the three GRO indexes:

: Sample project sources.JPG (12.69 KiB) Viewed 3683 times

I've just re-set the Sample project in case I missed something, but the Munros are all there.

brianlummis · Post by **brianlummis** » 12 Dec 2020 17:45

There must be something that hasn't been passed on to the Beta testers! My recently downloaded FH7 now has Lawrence George Buchanan DAVIS as Record ID No. 1. Perhaps someone needs to check with Calico Pie as I can't be the only person with the new Sample Project called SAMPLE_UK and we could find ourselves talking at Cross Purposes if we are not all using the same Project.

Post by **LornaCraig** » 12 Dec 2020 17:51

I installed the new full V7 in the same way as you would have done, with the download from CP and it installed over my existing V6. (The beta V7 ran completely separately, so wouldn't affect it). And doing a re-set of the Sample project does not change it!

Post by **tatewise** » 12 Dec 2020 17:52

Brian, are you saying you have a Project in the Project Window named SAMPLE_UK?
I suspect that comes from somewhere else and is nothing to do with the FH Sample Project.

I'd be very surprised if CP had change the name from Family Historian Sample Project.

What happens when you use More Tasks... > Samples > Reset Sample Project?

brianlummis · Post by **brianlummis** » 12 Dec 2020 18:30

Mike/Lorna

Apologies, it seems as though I have a rogue Sample Project. I now find I have two samples in my Project Window, the one at the bottom of the list being SAMPLE_UK which being in CAPITALS attracted the eye. I haven't looked at the sample projects for some time so I was not looking for the Family Historian Sample Project which was further up my list of projects. I am not sure where this rogue project came from but I think I will delete it to save any confusion in the future. Strangely, whoever did make up the SAMPLE_UK project did seem to follow my thinking as to the recording method for the citation for the GRO Index- or could it be that some time in the past I was influenced by their thinking so have unconsciously followed their suggestion.

Brian

EDIT: I believe the rogue SAMPLE_UK was a project in TMG before I moved to FH 6 years ago! I have no idea why I kept it all this time.

Family Historian User Group

* Publishing report

Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report

Re: Publishing report