View Full Version : Sources

25 October 2005, 07:59 PM
When I enter sources I always specify page number in the detail field. Exporting to gedcom this ends up with the tag text but should i t not been page? What am I doing wrong?


26 October 2005, 05:01 AM
A Detail field can contain several kind of information. It is NOT limited to only a pagenumber.
So, in my opinion, the export tag 'TEXT' with the source is correct: the detail field contain text, it might be a pagenumber but can also be: A sub c.
So you do nothing wrong, you think a detail field is restricted to a pagenumber and it is not.

By the way, read also the paragraph 'Using the Detail field' in the Manual Chapter: 'Sources in Names, Events, Facts' for more information and with a few sample how you can use this field.

26 October 2005, 12:11 PM
Frans - the problem is more like where do I enter this info so it gets exported with the proper tag. According to my understanding of the gedcom5.5. std. this info should come out with a PAGE tag. I have been going through my family file to correct things because on export from me to a family member much of the information did not get imported right. I think this is very important regarding sources.


26 October 2005, 01:36 PM
The detail field can be used for several things, and you want to use this for entering a page number, but you want to export specific sources in Gedcom with a page number.
Okay, I see what you want and in my opinion you can do that without problems.

In Options -> Define -> Source Fields, you see that Reunion has a predefined source field with the name Page and with the Gedcom Tag PAGE. So it is present in Reunion.
Then go to Option -> Define Source Types. There are a lot of predefined source types
Go to the one you use, by example Family bible or Book and simple add a field called Page

Now you have a source type (Family Bible or Book) where you can specify the page.
Go to the place you want to add a source, click on source and choose the one you want: Family Bible or Book and you see that the source field Page is added.
In the Gedcom export this field is added to the source.

Might be this is what you are looking for ?

26 October 2005, 02:37 PM
Frans thanks,

I see what you mean and I will try to make a small family file, using your advice. But still I run into problems getting gedcom's from others. If you go to this link: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~pmcbride/gedcom/55gcch2.htm#EVENTS_RECORDED

and copy the small gedcom (not the small source record), then paste it into word or Appleworks and then save it with the ged-ending. If you then import this into Reunion it all looks OK. But if you then export it, tags has changed names. And the next one to import it propably will loose information. This is what I try to avoid.


26 October 2005, 04:27 PM
Look at the chapter of Gedcom limitations in Reunion.
It is, as a standard file format, much less relaibale than other file formats (like picture or sound formats)

A genealogy programm with a 100 percent identical gedcom output, compared with the imput (that comes from another genealogy programm), does not exist.
The interpretation of implementation Gedcom in programms is often different, the rules can be explained in different way.
There is no way that you can be 100 % sure that all the data that is in your geneallgy file is completely transported, there are lots and lots of pitfalls, but that is the same for EVERY genealogy programm.
Indeed when you import and export and gedcom file to A and after that to B and then to C it is possible that you can loose little information, but not for the common fields.
But ... tell a story to A and he tells to B and then to C etc... after a few persons you have a complete different story
But Leister can respond on this problem more accurate. (but they explained this problems already in the manual)

The Gedcom standard 5.5 is old (from january 1996). There is a beta version of version 6 is from december 2002 and is still a draft version
Meanwhile the possibilities of computers and programming are grown expansive and I think that a protocol is always behind the reality.