I would like a feature to hide or have a different icon for 'lost children' 19th century Poland 1/2 of the deaths in many years were children. I like having these children documented, but sometimes would like to view the tree with these omitted to get a better prespective on things. If hiding is to to difficult to program, I think alternate icons to the pink blue and gray ones would be easy. Have two more icons for lost child male or female.
I’m an Indian. In India similar to our national language Hindi (Already supported by FTB), we have several other languages spoken in different parts of the country like Kannada, Tamil, Guajarati, Etc.
Since I hail from Karnataka, I would love to make use of Kannada as additional language to English. Our state govt has already a software utility for Kannada script (Link provided below). FTB can provide a generic socket for interfacing variety of external languages like Kannada.
I am not sure why the reply to the queries are always neglected. " Is it a Cristmas/ New year vacation ?" . Adding to the below suggestion, I would also like to make one more praposal.
Currently the GEDCOM file, universally used for building family trees have a strange format which is not understandable with the naked eyes. Why cant this be transformed/migrated to XML based structure which is quite easier and easily adaptable. The advantage of this would be that, we can make use readily available parsers to extract informations and do customised operations (What ever it may be).
Wishing you all, a Happy new year 2011.
Thanks and regards
Chetan
Hi,
I’m an Indian. In India similar to our national language Hindi (Already supported by FTB), we have several other languages spoken in different parts of the country like Kannada, Tamil, Guajarati, Etc.
Since I hail from Karnataka, I would love to make use of Kannada as additional language to English. Our state govt has already a software utility for Kannada script (Link provided below). FTB can provide a generic socket for interfacing variety of external languages like Kannada.
1) thank you for the suggestion for the additional language. I will pass it on to the appropriate department for consideration.
2) Gedcom files are the standard file type in genealogy today, and this is why we use them. If you open a Gedcom file in notepad, then you will see the information is very straightforward, and actually not difficult to follow.
But as I use Tree as my focalpoint in my investigation I would prefer the presence of a source to be visible for the Facts in Tree view. Edit Fact should furthermore provide an option to add/change/delete the associated Source.
As somebody has copied a branch of my family - wihtout having any relationsship to me - I would like the possibility to introduce an Ignore/Reject option in SmartMatch to prevent the match to show up in future SmartMatches in my online tree.
SmartMatch ought to be an aid instead of a pain in the b...
I would also like to see something done about inacvtive, abandoned accounts. Have a flag next to the site manager name if they have not logged in for a period of time - 12 months for example.
I uderstand that I cannot enjoy bothe worlds, but I would encourage you to prevent access to pictures belonging to still living persons. I can live with the fact that someone copies a branch where I am a part - but I wouldn't like to see my picture in a familytree based on a faulty match.
I don't like current cocenpt of family pages because it makes using this site much more complicated. Let's consider a situation: I'm being send an invitation to a family tree (of over 2000 people!). I make an account, log in and start using the service. And now, what should become part of my own tree, is still sb elses. If I don't have an admin status I can't: change the person being displayed when I enter the tree, export the tree to a file and what's the biggest mistake - I'm part of somebodys' family site (It says 'Family site of XYZ' instead of my own). This approach comes with many drawbacks- the biggest is inefficiency in building common family tree (if I want to have my own tree I have to build it from scratch) - which should be the main purpose of this site! Moreover lots of additional data is being generated because people instead of participating in building one unite tree build their own ones, so many many people are being duplicated in the system (here's where Smart Match is in action). More data = bigger costs.
And now how it should look like( look at moikrewni.pl which you co-opt at a time): when I receive an invitation, I log in and I'm being passed to a part of a bigger tree (the one consisting of 2000 people! - which becomes my tree as well) where my profile is shown. Here I can complete any info, add additional people and so on. We work on the same tree but it's shown as my own (not 'Family XYZ'). Adventage: less data produced (don't have to build my own tree from scratch and duplicate data), much easier to cooperate (we work on the same tree), my profile is being viewed when I enter the family tree, I can export the tree to file, I'm not in somebody elses family tree site but in my own. Obviously I like the concept of a family site where we can store any info about family history and so on BUT it should be moved to a profile info or at least it should generate separate family site when someone accepts an invitation - but still share the same tree.
I find it the biggest drawback of this genealogy site, comparing to some others. Hope you will see the benefits of my solution. Regards
Yep, but that's not the point. I've already put some effort into this tree and now I'm being forced to recreate it. Adding 250 people with all their additional data (births, deaths etc.) would take much time. I'm not asking how to solve the problem - it's obvious that I can make my own tree. I'm just saying that the architecture and the general concept of this site could be done better.
I suggest that the statistics pages include setting where you can view statistics for only the descendants of a certain person or people or alternately to exclude the descendants of a person or people. For example my tree records anyone who shares an ancestry with either myself or my wife. A parameter could be built into the settings so that when you go in it displays the male heads of each branch. To qualify as a branch head the person has to be a male who does not have any recorded parents or parents in law. You then have the option to exclude any branch or any multiple branches from the stats and then submit to get revised stats.
I was reading this story the other day about how the US Library of Congress is enlisting the help of web denizens in identifying people in archived pictures:
When I started searching about using face recognition technology to help find relatives from these images, I stumbled across this site. I wanted to suggest that, if you are not already actively doing it, it could be helpful to ingest these photographs into your system. This sounds like a great way to help about the Library of Congress and at the same time gain some notoriety for your technology.
The usage of photos and face recognition with people search is a very touchy subject as it touches many of the delicates aspects of privacy. We are indeed using face recognition to allow users to better manage the photos within their own family sites. This allows users to enjoy the power of this technology without being afraid of any misuse or privacy abuse.
