Ancestry Family Tree software has a great MERGE function. Why can't FTB have the same or better function?
Ancestry Family Tree also has an invaluable DATE CALCULATOR I wish FTB had.
There is one other thing I wish FTB had and that is a box below the BURIED AT box on the MAIN Tab of the person card to put the "FindaGrave.com" memorial number. Find-a-Grave is a most valuable resource for information. It would also be great if, when you click on the memorial #, a new tab would be opened in your browser and that memorial would be loaded.
The smart match web page is a great functionality for finding more information, and for the last few months I've been spending a lot of time there. I see the number of matches confirmed by others and awaiting my confirmation - great. I see the number of matches I have confirmed, awaiting confirmation by others - curently 13,894, but I can't see how many matches are awaiting confirmation by either me or others, and I would like to know how I am progressing at accessing and confirming or rejecting matches - that is, how many more have do I currently have left to view?
Since I have 27,455 matches, does thois mean I still have 13,600 or so to go? I think not - as this number would include the unknown number that have been confirmed by both the others and me. Now, I am guessing that at some stage the website does a calculation on how many matches are confirmed by only one person, so it should be an easy matter to add the extra couple of data for later display. (I note that the "matches awaiting confirmation by others" updates whenever I return to the smart match page.
What I would like to see is :
--> Matches still unconfirmed and unrejected by either tree owner (#1 importance)
--> number that have been confirmed by both the others and me ( not so important, but of interest )
--> Matches rejected by me and awaiting rejection by others ( not so important, but of interest )
--> number that have been rejected by both the others and me ( not so important, but of interest )
This data could be presented in a simple table, and I think would greatly interest those that use the site for smart-matching.
I have two screens and display FTB on one and the website on the other.
And I simply ignore how many matches I have or others may have confirmed or whatever.
I have a system. I go to the website/ Family Tree/ SmartMatches, then at the top right choose the actual family tree I want to work on. Then I select People, Last Name, and page 1 (or wherever I am up to, I list just the date, page number and name in an exercise book).
Then (in the web site) review each entry where there are matches to confirm, checking each match individually.
I display 'family members'; this often shows whether it is a true match; in which case I use the edit function to include new information or for corrections.
If there seem to be a lot of new people in SmartMatches (related to a particular person, for example another tree has details of all the children in a large family and I have none) I will probably use the Merge function in Family Tree Builder.
And I go through the entire list of people, alphabetically, that way. An advantage of that is that when you look at all family members in order you are more familiar with them...
I do something similar, but I do not look at the alphabetical listing by name. I have over 5300 people in the tree, and although the listing by name shows the number of matches and number not checked - agreed - but this is on over 100 pages, and it is not easy to get to a particular page or name without downloaded 20 or so pages along the way. My point, though, was to find out how many remain to be accepted or rejected, just so I know how much is left to do.
' although the listing by name shows the number of matches and number not checked - agreed - but this is on over 100 pages, and it is not easy to get to a particular page or name without downloaded 20 or so pages along the way.'
But in the web site, in Smart Matches, I just look at the next alpha listing in bold type, which shows ( x ) matches to confirm, and click View Matches. No searching.
In FBT use Quick Find to choose the name you have found in the web site alpha list; not as easy if you have only one screen, I wouldn't be without the second one.
In a person's 'card' I would like to see separate spaces to enter birth details, and baptism details.
Usually in older documents it is baptism that is recorded not birth; and it is a PAIN to see that most enter the baptism details in the birth space in their tree. It is not the same thing and it is usually not the same date.
I agree. If the built in fact of baptism/burial is used no information is shown in Smart matches until you go in to tree view. I usualy use the baptism/burial dates with "about" in the birth and death dates. However I see many that takes my about date and use it as actual date which is very wrong.
I have seen dates that differ weeks between birth and baptism for deaths even more if the person walked thru the ice in winter and found in the spring.
If there was a mecanism for the dates in the cards that show the baptism/burial dates if birt/death dates are missing with a clear info of which date is shown would help a lot.
And there is the less usual case of adult baptism. Some of my ancestors were Baptists who practise this, along I think with some other religions. And baptism can be many years after birth, maybe fifteen years to possibly more than twenty!
Sometimes you can find separate references to birth and to baptism, sometimes there could be a clue like marriage of the parents in a Baptist Church but I think that might be rare in old documents; which themselves are not easy to find.
I do hope MH refer this to their Genealogists, their expertise would be invaluable.
We currently don't have a forecast release date for that specific collection.
Our Content Department Team is constantly working on adding more and more data on existing collections, as well as adding new collections and broading the countries we cover. On an average bi-weekly basis new data is added to our database, so I recommend that you come back in a near future and repeat the same searchs to which right now you haven't had many or any results.
This topic is about better - allowing - facilitating - multiple editors on a single family tree and about enhancing collaboration between family trees. It is about providing more control - better levels of control - or more "granularity" in controlling who can see and who can author part of a site.
Yes, I can invite anyone to share my tree.
Yes, I can give everyone authoring rights on my tree. But site members can author or not. The only way to allow some to author and some to not author is to promote some to site managers. I'd like just a little more granularity.
Having a number of people edit the family tree and collaborate on the development is the "main" reason I chose to put the family tree online. I like many things about myHeritage, but I do think that sharing and collaboration could be made a lot better. This is not a complaint specific to myHeritage - IMHO most sites could improve here. Therefore, I think that if you were to make some improvements in this area it could be an important distinction when chosing a genealogy provider.
Here are some ideas:
Ancestory allow invited guests. Ancestry guest on a private site see living people as "private" tiles in exactly the same way as non-site members see living people on public sites. Could myHeritage consider allowing invited guests. Also can you consider making invited guests different from invited authors (persons who can edit and who would see all the details of living people).
Linking trees. Sites can have multiple trees. Also a person can be a member on multiple sites. It would be nice if trees could be linked around any selected tile. Once a link is established, the tile would display a "Link" button similar to a record match. The link button would appear on the tile of a person who is in two trees that members wish to link up - a link between the person in two trees, therefore a link between the two trees. In tree mode, clicking the "Link" button would toggle the display to the chosen tile (same person) in the other tree. This could be useful within a site - linking from one of my trees to another of my trees - but it could also be used across sites - linking from a person in my tree to the same person in another member's tree if I am a member of both sites (i.e. if we share our trees and create the link). It would certainly make collaboration a lot easier and friendlier. Linking might be offered as an option for premium and premium plus sites.
(See image here)
Different user permissions for each tree. If I have multiple trees on my site, it would be nice to allow a person to be an AUTHOR on one tree and a GUEST on another (see point one).
Tracking changes. I know adding a full wiki style history tracking to a site would be a huge ask. So I am not asking for that. However, when there are multiple editors it would be nice to know who made the last change to any given person in the tree, and on what date the change was made. Two simple bits of information that would make collaboration much, much easier. (e.g. Last change: 25-8-14, Steve). This could appear on the expanded tile (when one clicks the tile) and/or on the "Edit Profile" window when one clicks the "pencil" icon, and also in the Full Profile mode.
Sharing pictures. Current permission settings seem to only allow me to share all photos or none (Access has four options - photos is one). I can make multiple albums and chose which is public. I would like to choose which ones I share so I can just provide access to one album on the front page - before login - and not have to provide access to all photos. I would like to be able to share just one album with another myHeritage member - or group of members and not have to provide access to all photos. Better granularity in sharing albums would be much appreciated.
All of these ideas are about collaboration across sites and within a site by multiple site members. I think that the more myHeritage can facilitate user collaboration both within a site, and across sites, the more it will distinguish itself from other products in the genealogy market. My apologies if any of this is already possible.
Yes, I understand that "Guests" always seen living people as private and acknowledge your definition of "Guests". I can see that my use of the term "Guest" might have caused some confusion.
What I was referring too is that in Ancestory a private site (not normally visible to community members or guest users) can invite a person to join as a "Guest" (their term). I know because I was invited by an Ancestory user to see a private site and I am just a "guest" on the private site. Which effectively makes the private site visible to selected persons but not the whole community. These "invited" guests still only see living people as "private".
MH lacks a similar user level. In MH, if I invite a person to join my private site, they will see all records, including records of living people, all I can control is whether or not they edit - not what they see.
I was suggesting that it would be nicer to be able to invite people to join a private site and have greater control over what they can see - AND - greater control over who can edit.
The article you linked to shows that the editing choices are limited.
Everyone who joins can edit, OR just You (the owner) can edit. To have some edit and some not edit, the only choice is to promote some members to "Site Managers" and then allow "All Site Managers" to edit. This has ramifications because of what else "managers" can do.
Having additional levels of membership would be nicer and might allow control over who can see living members and which non site managers can edit.
For example: Here I'll called the levels "Viewers", "Contributors" and "Managers" for want of a name. I suggest "Viewers" could be invited members who don't edit and who see living members as "private" tiles. I suggest "Contributors" and "Managers" are like the current two levels of membership and could be allowed to edit - using permission settings as is the current practice. In this example I'm just suggesting one more level of users in private sites to help manage what can be seen. It would also be nice to have more control over which non-site managers can edit.
This would help a lot when trying to build a private research site and encourage family collaboration. Just thoughts for consideration!
Thanks again for your interest and for offering to forward the suggestions on to the developers.
I'd love the communities and the developers thoughts on a few ideas.
After 8 months of fairly intense use, there are a couple of things I would like to ask for in future developments, if you would indulge me just a little. These comments refer to the "newer" GUI.
I would love to see a couple of improvements in the "Tree Mode" so I can see (and edit) more information without having to go into the "Full Profile Mode".
In tree mode, clicking the "pencil" icon on a tile pops up an "Edit Profile" window. In the popup window, clicking the "camera" icon slides in a new right pane to allow the author to "Upload a Photo".
My suggestion. ADD two new button (or icons) for two more slide-in options. One button to allow a slide-in "Biography" pane and one buton to allow a slide-in "Events" pane (See picture links at the bottom of post).
Biography: I think it is important to be able to edit and quickly read the biography page of a person from tree view. The biography is more about "Family History" while the family tree is more about "Genealogy". Family History is very important to me, and to other researchers, and it should be as easy to see and edit as the Genealogy is.
All Events: I end up in Full Profile mode too often, just to add two little bits of information.
I have to go to full profile edit to add a burial date. I can add the burial place in the "Edit Profile" popup, but not the date. I can add the death date, but not the burial date. Simple Fix
I have to go to full profile to add the "Nick Name" or the name by which the person was commonly known. I can add John Smith in the popup, but have to go to full profile edit to add John "Jack" Smith. Simple Fix (Same Pic - you'll see I've added 'burial date' and 'nick name')
I have to go to full profile mode to add a persons occupation and other nice to know facts. This is not as annoying as the above two points, but a slide-in "Edit Events" pane could address this problem.