Using FTB 6 (I'm not adventurous enough to try the new one yet!);
In the person's 'card', ( Tree View, right click in the big blue or pink area, left click on Edit Details) in the 'deceased' section, there is a spot for 'buried at'.
All that would be needed is a function to list and index these details; simple...
Now here is one for people more expert with software than me; in FTB, under 'Edit', you have the option to 'Export to Excell', 'Export Custom Report', then you can click on (under 'Fields to Export") the button 'Selected Fields' and there is the opportunity to check various fields including Burial.
Is that going to give you the information you want, after you index the burial places (which ought to come up, not just the dates) in Excel?
Please let me know if it works, I am as shy as a virgin bride with software but I like the idea of a list of people in particular cemeteries; we may do a journey around them one day. Pictures, GPS locations....
The custom report should include burial and alt burial and will automatically include first and last name and other information.
It takes some knowledge of spreadsheets (I use Open Office) but you will sort the report by burial place. You can also filter/group by cemetery depending on your knowledge and the spreadsheet you're using. Here's a slightly edited sample; it took me about three minutes to make.
Brittin Cemetery, Elkhorn, Douglas Co, Nebraska, USA
Brittin Cemetery, Elkhorn, Douglas Co, Nebraska, USA
Brookside Cemetery, Fort St. John, British Columbia, Canada
Brown Township Union Cemetery, Indiana, USA
Brown Township Union Cemetery, Indiana, USA
Brunyard Cemetery, Banyard, Bourbon, Kentucky, USA
I use this type of custom report on a regular basis for my cemetery walk-arounds. I also record in the burial location description the marker # if known but alas there is no option for including that information in the report to print as yet. Told it has been passed on to the developers......
In a past life I suggested a cemetery option but it was never taken up.
I also think that having got a cemetery function- the lease tenure would be a great asset. In some countries ( Australia for one) there are multitudes of tenure from everelasting to 100 years to 50 years. and it would be good for the family renuion folk to be awarer that a important grave is up for re-lease.
Australia has a lot of cemetery re-use and that wwould be prevented if enough people tokk enough interest in preserving the burial place.
So to cap this off- there is also the method of dispiosal that Is becoming more and morean issue. In the past we Burial or cremation but now with aquamation and resomation into the plan- the nwhole issue of remains disposal, placement and tenure are bit more of a complictaed issue.
In some countries ( Australia for one) there are multitudes of tenure from everelasting to 100 years to 50 years. and it would be good for the family renuion folk to be awarer that a important grave is up for re-lease.
As lack of space in cemeteries makes ground burial impractical, cremation is becoming more common. In some cemeteries, graves and cremain plots are being doubled (over/under) and up to six cremains are allowed in a single standard grave plot.
Hadn't heard of leased plots before; this article says it's in effect in South Australia and is being considered in other AU states. If a lease is not renewed, the remains are exhumed and reburied deeper in the same plot. A single grave might hold three generations -- and why not?
Still, genealogists and the software we use will need to be flexible enough to cope with "burial" practices such as leased graves, ossuaries (an old practice that may be renewed), ashes scattered at sea, alkaline hydrolysis product stored in Grandma's living room, cremains shot into space...
They key to understanding why myheritage does not (yet) grasp burial trenusre - ie grave leasing, is that obviously the americans dont have leased plots. If THEY had to lease burial plots then ALL software developers woudl , by default, make burial tenure a feature of software.
Family Tree Builder is from Israel. Tiny country, big population, where for religious reasons grave resuse is not permitted, according to this article.
But I know what you mean; probably most MH customers are in America and it's those customers who drive the market.
For those who insist on whole-body interment, I'd say plant 'em vertically. Drill a round hole 12' deep (far easier than a 4'x7'x6'deep rectangular hole). Place the corpse in a cardboard core, seal both ends, drop it down feet first. Pack 'em like sardines. Standing room only.
Not meaning to be irreverant, but it strikes me as an efficient solution for getting a lot of folks into a small cemetery while still allowing individual graves. Sure to be some legal/ethical/environmental/sentimental/whatever problem with it, though.
[[ For those who insist on whole-body interment, I'd say plant 'em vertically. Drill a round hole 12' deep (far easier than a 4'x7'x6'deep rectangular hole). Place the corpse in a cardboard core, seal both ends, drop it down feet first. Pack 'em like sardines. Standing room only. ]]
THAT is friggin hilarious!!!! Irrevrant or not, I like it.
On a more serious note... and speaking of America in particular ( home sweet home ), isn't it interesting that we're running out of space in our cemeteries, that they're paving over family plots for commercial use, etc... but we still have plenty of room for GOLF COURSES??? The darn things are popping up in the oddest places, and reproducing as quickly as mushrooms.
I suggest we use all the golf courses all over the world for cemeteries, AND stack 'em in vertically! I would sure make getting a "hole in one" a whole lot more meaningful!
I accidently & by misinformation added a mothers name that was wrong. I continued on this tree and have numerous people added under this person, including myself, I tried deleting the mother but now it just says unknown and I'm still not able to link with other mother. Does this mean I will have to delete all the work I have done and start over? It would be so nice if I could just link her to her right mother and get rid of this unknown completely.
After going thru all SMs (over 100 000 in total) I have just over 100 SMs left which I cant deside if they should be confirmed or rejected.
Anyway, during this process I have some comments:
The lists of matches (both tree and person listings) needs an extra sort clause (Tree/Person name). Why? If trees/persons has the same amount of matches they will jump around in the list and makes it very hard to know which ones you allready have visited.
If you go in on a person and verify and then go in to the Compare tree tab,you will allways come back to the Tree list and page one. Not to the page of the listing you started from with selected sort order. Also it seems to be an expiering cookie that will make you come back to Tre View Page 1. That timer needs to be extended.
If the list of matches is longer than the page limit, the confirm/reject all will of course be all but it would be better if it was just all on that page. I have noticed when I have browsed the list of SMs that I have missed some because they have jumped around (see point above) and by that made the wrong decition and confirmed/rejected some that should not be that.
It would be great if it was possible to make a selection SMs from a listing to handle them in batch. I.E All persons named Peter when "your" person is Lars (the brother) and be able to reject all of them at once.
All individual SMs should have a checkbox to select them individual and be able to Confirm/reject all the selected ones in one command. This will speed up the process significantly.
The commands Confirm/reject would be good if they also where available in the bottom of the list so you dont have to scroll back to top to select the command.
1. The Smart Match Icon Should only be present if there are undesided or confirmed matches. If there is only confirmed matches the Icon could have a Thicker sqare line around it. More information at a glance. There is absolutely no information in the presents of rejected Smart Matches.
2. In the list of matches there should be a checkbox for omit rejected Smart Matches. -- It should realy be the other way, a checkbox for including rejected Smart Matches. The normal appearence for the list of Smart Matches should be without the rejected Smart Matches. Both for Persons and Trees, it is tiresome to be bothered with things I have gone through before. (and if you go wrong in which ones you have answered, the next time you enter Mathces, they will still be there)
I've also noticed that after you have completed going though all the Smart Matches, having confirmed or rejected them, and scroll through the lists of all the other sites that have shown up as having matches with your site, that many of the other sites are listed several times with 6 matches on one, 2 matches on one, etc. I would like all these combined into one posting for each site. Also, it lists the sites with which I had zero matches, which is a total waste of time and space. I'd like these removed from the listing. Finally, I'd like a search option on this listing in order to find another site quickly, instead of having to search through hundreds of pages to access a particular site with which I have matches. Hope this rambling is getting my ideas across and is not too confusing.
As you have mentioned "that many of the other sites are listed several times with 6 matches on one, 2 matches on one, etc", this is happening because SmartMatches are given per tree and not per site. So if there are more than one family tree in a particular site then you may receive SmartMatches from all of these trees sepperatly.
With regards to your other suggestions, thank you for that and I will let the appropriate department know about this for possible consideration with future updates.
I have a set of children born to a mother and father. The father dies. The mother remarries. The new husband adopts the children. Reunion for Mac handles this flawlessly, but MyHeritage arbitrarily decides that the children can belong under only one set of parents. Can you add this feature to a future update.