Announcement

**JamesWinfrey** · 28 October 2014, 05:02 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by Mason0315 View Post

New Reunion user - imported a small GEDCOM (255 people) from FTM3. In looking at the resultant Family file, sources are "bundled". I have a source #75, which opens a record showing the information for everyone who had a reference in that basic source - a city directory, being overkill for the person referenced.

Other sources seem to be bundled the same way. Are there TAG adjustments I could make in the GEDCOM, or should I just port very small subsets between the two.

I have 4000+ people in FTM3, and intend to use Reunion 10 as my true reference, using FTM3 as the research tool, as others here do. Reunion looks much more flexible.

FYI I am running Yosemite.

The bundling you are seeing is FTMM3's way of recording who is being referenced by that source. When you import into Reunion, Reunion sets up its own process for tracking source usage - so, you do not need to keep the information that FTMM3 stores.

Jim

**Mason0315** · 28 October 2014, 09:25 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by JamesWinfrey View Post

The bundling you are seeing is FTMM3's way of recording who is being referenced by that source. When you import into Reunion, Reunion sets up its own process for tracking source usage - so, you do not need to keep the information that FTMM3 stores.

Jim

I would like Reunion to pickup my source references for each person. I am led to believe this is a problem between FTM3 and Reunion - however Tech support has agreed to discuss this point. My City Directory references for individuals, with the document page attached to each person referenced on that page is an example. Hate to put the Multimedia record and then manually link everyone, when that information and record are already in the GEDCOM.

The current GEDCOM translation puts all of the individual City Directory entries one after another, under one source. You do not know which entry applies to the person you are clicking on a Source number for.

**Mark** · 29 October 2014, 01:11 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Hi Carlton,

Originally posted by Mason0315 View Post

The current GEDCOM translation puts all of the individual City Directory entries one after another, under one source.

This problem is different than the one we've been discussing via e-mail, if I understand correctly (what we've been discussing via e-mail has been purely about the multimedia linked to source citations/events). What you're seeing here is a result of the fact that FTM3 allows much larger citation detail fields than Reunion, meaning that you can put more information into that field in FTM3 than Reunion allows in that same field.

As a result, when you import that information, instead of chopping off any of the citation detail that does not fit within Reunion's citation detail field (limited to 255 characters) the citation detail gets transferred to the Free-Form Text field of the source.

This is intentional and is, we felt, the best way to handle the issue.

I hope that helps explain the situation.

**Mason0315** · 30 October 2014, 11:06 AM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

I agree with that concept. I have sent you email.

**Kathy C** · 12 December 2014, 02:17 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by Mark View Post

Hi Carlton,

This problem is different than the one we've been discussing via e-mail, if I understand correctly (what we've been discussing via e-mail has been purely about the multimedia linked to source citations/events). What you're seeing here is a result of the fact that FTM3 allows much larger citation detail fields than Reunion, meaning that you can put more information into that field in FTM3 than Reunion allows in that same field.

As a result, when you import that information, instead of chopping off any of the citation detail that does not fit within Reunion's citation detail field (limited to 255 characters) the citation detail gets transferred to the Free-Form Text field of the source.

This is intentional and is, we felt, the best way to handle the issue.

I hope that helps explain the situation.

Hi Mark...... It does explain the situation, but does not say if there is something we can do to fix this issue!

I'm moving from RootsMagic to Reunion 10 and noticed this same issue. Do I have to go thru manually and fix this? With 10,000 people in my database, that will probably keep me in RootsMagic.

In my case, I lump my sources. For instance, all 1920 U.S. census entries use the same source. I use the Detail field in each entry to enter in details such as location, ED, page #, etc. It doesn't seem to me that RM's detail field is so large ..... these are separate citations for separate people referencing the same source but Reunion lumps them all together when it imports the gedcom! Please tell me this can be somehow fixed.........

Kathy

**Mark** · 12 December 2014, 02:41 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by Kathy C View Post

Do I have to go thru manually and fix this?

You would need to fix it manually, yes. It's simply the result of different design philosophies between Reunion and Rootsmagic (and FTM3) - the citation detail field in Reunion is limited to 255 characters because citation details are not intended to contain large amounts of text, only short bits that give information like page number, volume, etc.

You are, of course, welcome to add a wish list item to request an increase in the number of characters the citation detail is limited to - however, I can't make any promises as to whether or not such a change would be implemented.

**Kathy C** · 12 December 2014, 11:36 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Thank you,Mark, for your speedy reply.

I still don't understand this. In RM, you have a source, say the 1940 census. Then the source details for that citation ..... Those apply to the person you are linking the source to. When you use that same source for a different person, you enter in different citation details. Why should Reunion lump all citation details together for everyone that uses the same source?

It seems we're not really talking about the same thing.

**kmgenealogy** · 13 December 2014, 06:58 AM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by Kathy C View Post

Thank you,Mark, for your speedy reply.

I still don't understand this. In RM, you have a source, say the 1940 census. Then the source details for that citation ..... Those apply to the person you are linking the source to. When you use that same source for a different person, you enter in different citation details. Why should Reunion lump all citation details together for everyone that uses the same source?

It seems we're not really talking about the same thing.

I can't seem to picture what you're talking about, Kathy. Could you, perhaps, provide a screenshot?

**Mark** · 13 December 2014, 06:42 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by Kathy C View Post

Why should Reunion lump all citation details together for everyone that uses the same source?

Normally, Reunion doesn't - however, if you import a GEDCOM that contains citation details that go over the 250 character limit of Reunion's citation detail field, it gets put into the free-form text field of the source. Otherwise the data would be truncated after 255 characters.

**Kathy C** · 14 December 2014, 09:05 AM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

OK, Mark. I'm seeing a glimmer of understanding on my part now.

In RM, for each citation, in addition to the Detail field (ED, page, etc.) there is a field for adding in Research Notes/Comments which I use to give a summary (for a census, for instance) of who else was enumerated in the household. That text would certainly put the entire entry over 255 characters. I could see that the resulting entry would go to the Free Form field. That would be desirable. ...... but Reunion still is lumping all citations for that source into each Free Form field that uses that source, including every one of the source's citations and those Research Notes/Comments that apply. If it just used the info that was in the particular Research Note/Comments field for that citation, it would be great ..... but it doesn't.

So, to hopefully make it clearer ...... I have a source, the 1900 U.S. census. That source is used by, say 100 people in my database. Each one has a separate citation detail that includes location, ED, page. etc. Each time I use the Source, I obviously change the details to be appropriate for that usage. Also, in the Research Notes/Comments field of RM, I add the summary info that applies to that household. Now, in Reunion, the Source and its Detail info appear correctly. But, when you double click on the Source to open the Source window, not only is the info there (source, detail, and that Reserarch Note/Comments field) for that citation ...... but it is there for EVERY entry in my database that uses that Source! Each of those entries shows all info pertinent to that entry. So, whenever I print a report to include Sources, I have a real mess on my hands!

Hopefully, that explains my issues and concerns regarding this. I don't have a problem with Reunion dumping that Research Notes/Comment info into the Free Form area. Only that it lumps all of it together!

It doesn't appear there is anything to do about this except not use Reunion or make a lot of work for myself trying to fix this but I just wanted my problem to be properly understood because others trying to make this transition will encounter it also.

**ttl** · 14 December 2014, 09:54 AM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by Kathy C View Post

I don't have a problem with Reunion dumping that Research Notes/Comment info into the Free Form area. Only that it lumps all of it together!

In Reunion, the Free Form Text field in a source is common to every citation of a source. Only the Detail field is unique to the citation. So in practice starting from scratch, a Free Form Text field will generally have more information about a source than about a person unless maybe the Reunion user has very granular sources (census pages rather than one source that encompasses all states, counties, and districts).

I'm wondering if being able to put the Research Notes/Comment info from a person's source citation into a Notes field for the person when imported, with a citation referencing the source it came from, would be something that would meet your needs. That way, the person-unique info from the source would stay with the proper person without fundamentally changing the way Reunion sources work. The possibility of doing this would depend in large part on how RM constructs the GEDCOM file.

I have a background in software requirements and I'm just trying to think of a way to present a wish list request that has a chance of being fulfilled.

**ttl** · 14 December 2014, 10:17 AM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

As a side comment, Reunion has the ability to exclude selected source fields from report endnotes, but oddly enough, Free Form Text doesn't seem to be one of them.

**Kathy C** · 14 December 2014, 12:04 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by ttl View Post

I'm wondering if being able to put the Research Notes/Comment info from a person's source citation into a Notes field for the person when imported, with a citation referencing the source it came from, would be something that would meet your needs. That way, the person-unique info from the source would stay with the proper person without fundamentally changing the way Reunion sources work. The possibility of doing this would depend in large part on how RM constructs the GEDCOM file.

You're right, in that I could move that information out of that field in RM and put in the Notes field for the Fact or Event. That seems to be the only way to make this work. Thank you for your help!

**Mark** · 15 December 2014, 02:48 PM

Re: FTM3 GEDCOM to Reunion 10

Originally posted by Kathy C View Post

Hopefully, that explains my issues and concerns regarding this. I don't have a problem with Reunion dumping that Research Notes/Comment info into the Free Form area. Only that it lumps all of it together!

Kathy,

I understand the issues you have regarding this, I was simply explaining how Reunion handles the situation and why it handles the situation that way in order to give you (and any others who may be looking for this information) a good understanding of what's happening.

We recognize the results are not ideal, but we felt it was the best solution. However, we are open to other suggestions.