Yes, Mr. Cavalli, I can see it, but it seems you can not comprehend what I said.
In order to see what you showed me in the image, you have to scroll down on every person in the tree. This takes a lot of time. It would be much simpler if there was a symbol on the card indicating multiple spouses and then you could ignore the others instead of scrolling on them only to find they were married only once. Understand what I am saying now?
The issue with scrolling down depends, again as we already spoke personally by e-mail, on the size of your screen.
If you are working in a very small screen computer, like an Asus mini-laptop for instance, it will be clearly more difficult to display all the content of the tree. In a regular computer screen size, this issue mostly never appears.
The only way to make everything visible in small screens is putting on a scroll-down bar, otherwise, to re-frame the whole software would make the letters become very small and unreadable.
Whenever anyone adds or changes information or people on my web site tree I would like to receive an email telling me what information or person was added or changed and who added or changed it and when.
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.
I too have noticed the repitition of the same suggestions and answers, but in the end nothing is done. How are these duplicates started, and don't tell me it is us, I believe the GEDCOM has a lot to answer for this problem. I wish you would rewrite this conversion program.
And why is the merge duplicates not been installed into the Heritage program yet?, its been going on since your program was released, that was 7 generations ago??
FTM knows how to instal and run this merge duplicates program, why not have a look at it, I know it works very well as I have had to use it quite a few times after merging a gedcom files.
Unfortunately to transfer all the corrected data from FTM I would have to use GEDCOM which then recreates the original program, come on guys lets get this and the other silly problems sorted???
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.