After using the Instant Discovery feature, I have people that were married at 160 , having kids in their 190s, and others that got married before they were born. Obviously these entries have major issues.
I know I can just delete the people, but I hope there is some bit of good information. I would like to be able to mark these folks as questionable or needing new research. This would help others from copying bad info (and keep it from being used in the instant discoveries) and help me remember who I need to research more.
In the mean time, I won't use the Instant Discovery feature anymore.
1. I get a little tired of having to click twice to confirm a Smart Match. Every time I click on "Yes confirm this match" a window comes up asking me if I want to invite the other tree owner, and to confirm. I never do anything other than click confirm, but it's annoying having to do this every time. I have a lot of matches to get through as I have got quite a long way back in my tree so there are obviously a lot of matches.
2. Similarly, when I decide to ignore a tree (which I do if there's been no activity on it in the last year), then I have to click on a window to confirm (which is fine), but then I get ANOTHER window with a Notice telling me that I've chosen to ignore that tree and which I have to click to continue. Well, I KNOW I've chosen to ignore that tree as I've just confirmed it. It's just another click I have to make, again when there are a lot of them to do. It's tiresome and unnecessary.
3. When I eventually DID want to invite someone to join my tree, after they contacted me, I couldn't find a way to do it. It's probably there somewhere but it's not obvious. In the end I asked them to go to my tree and request access.
4. I'm not sure if this functionality is available, but it would be nice to find how two people in a tree are related. I'm in touch with someone who's distantly related, and we're going to meet up soon, but I can't remember which part of the tree he's related to and where our common ancestor lies, without having to trawl through the tree to find it. It would be nice to be able to type in his name and mine and find the common connection easily.
Oh and another one I forgot. Again, not sure if this is available somewhere, but it would be nice to be able to set a parameter on the system so that it automatically ignores Smart Matches from trees where there's been no activity earlier than a certain time ago, e.g 12 months.
Yes I agree there's a danger of missing some information. So I do take a brief look at what it's matched. 90% of the time it's my tree which has more information than theirs, and the person that's matched has come up again and again on other matches. So I take the view that there's unlikely to be anything further forthcoming from that particular tree.
It would be great if one could tag location on map while adding birth place etc. Different places are called by different names in different eras of time. And because of that, map location shown on profile is often inaccurate.
Also it would be great if one could open Map View which from one could visualize where his/hers family comes from. I know there is such global view, but it would be great to be able to zoom it in. Also it would be great to be able to choose which part of family is shown on map, for example only fathers side.
In FTB, you right-click on the person of interest, select "relation" and you get 3 options. Choose one, and you will get a little window showing you the link.
On the website, click on "Family Tree" and the "Relationship Report" to get a window that allows you to slect the people.
I, too, am annoyed by having to click twice - my answer would be to have two buttons on the page - one to confirm only, and one to confirm and send message. That would save having the window pop up when its only purpose is to give you a chance to send a message and add a comment, which no-one seems to do.
Jag tror att problemet är relaterat språkinställningar.
I Family Tree Builder är det möjligt att välja ett VISNINGSSPRÅK och ett INMATNINGSSPRÅK.
VISNINGSSPRÅK gäller benämningarna på alla knappar och kommandon i programmet. VISNINGSSPRÅK ändrar endast Family Tree Builder’s gränssnitt och påverkar inte någon information som du har skrivit in manuellt i trädet.
INMATNINGSSPRÅK gäller den information du själv skriver in i trädet. Namn, platser, anteckningar, etc. betraktas som DATA.
Family Tree Builder tillåter dig att mata in data i det Primära Dataspråket och det Sekundära Dataspråket.
Jag kommer att ge dig instruktioner om hur du gör detta.
1. Öppna din Family Tree Builder.
2. Klicka på Arkiv> Hantera projekt, välj ditt projekt, så det är färgad i blått. Klicka sedan på öppna.
3. När du har öppnat ditt släktträd, klicka på flaggikonen Ovest i menyn.
4. I det fönster som öppnas, klicka på Avancerade inställningar. (Se bild för visuell hjälp)
5. I nästa fönster, högerklicka för att få upp menyn Hantera uppgifter språk, klicka på denna.
6. I nästa fönster kan du se dina två språk (engelska och norska) kommer du också se att antalet stämmer inte.
För att datorerna ska kunna läsa all information på båda språken, måste all information finnas på båda språken,
7. Välj språk med flest uppgifter, så den lyser blått, klicka kopia.
8. I nästa fönster kommer du att uppmanas att kopiera från ett språk till ett annat, välja engelska i topp listan, och danska i nästa.
9. Klicka på kopior, kommer du nu se i föregående bild som danska och engelska har så mycket data. Kontrollera båda har så mycket data, kan du behöva kopiera båda sätten.
It is true I should have sent the screenshot 'Norwegian' instead of 'Danish' but I think Tor might have understood what I meant, since on the text I tell him to choose Norwegian and English (step 6).
Regarding the text language, I can only actually write in Swedish. But the Scandinavian languages are really intelligible for their speakers, especially Swedish and Norwegian, and I believe that Tor won't have any much difficulty in understanding it.
If not, he can let me know and I can send him again in English if it is easier for him, or ask another representative to answer him in Norwegian.
Instead of, or in addition to, the existing settings that allow site managers to determine who can edit the site can MyHeritage please give some consideration to a better and more flexible way to manage this.
Perhaps you could consider a rule-based system where the site manager could determine which site members could view branches in the tree and which site members could edit.
Here is an example of simple window with choices to make VIEWING or EDITING rules.
(Open the attached picture to see the suggestions for editing and viewing rules)
Giving us flexible control like this would greatly enhance the usability of the myHeritage Site and it would distinguish this Site form the competition.
From an administrative point of view, assigning rights to individuals is not overly complicated or a lot of work. It is something a Site Manager would normally do once, at the time a new member was invited/accepted on to the site.
The system I mentioned above looks complicated on first glance, but it is not (or at least it is not meant to be). It is just about giving a person 1/. viewing or edit rights and 2/. Selective rights or righs to the whole site. Selective rights cover 1/. their branch of the tree, or 2/. plus generations above them, or 3/. plus generations below them, and 4/. branches of partners (associated families).
There have been several suggestions to improve on this area of the online software. Each proposal is about giving Site Managers better control over how invited members contribute to Extended Family Sites. The current system is not very user friendly because it is all or nothing - everyone or no-one. In the current system the only way to select some members to be editors (as opposed to all members be editors) is to promote selected members to Site Managers and just allow site managers to edit. Having multiple site managers is not always desirable.
I'm sure it would be possible to devise a simply system to assign editing rights to individuals and this would be better than the current system.
If one chooses to assign rights with a role based system, like yours, then best practice would be to allow Site Managers to decide who gets what role. i.e. Allow Site Managers to assign a role to each invited site member. Four or five well chosen roles might be sufficient.
I hope MH will look carefully at this areas of their software and include some improvements in the next round of upgrades. Unfortunately the requests date back nearly three years and there has been no changes made by MH in that period.
It would help if we had some reason to have confidence that the development team were actually listening to suggestions made on this forum. Some feedback from the development team would be very nice.
In the time I have been a member I haven't seen any real evidence that any suggestions made on the forum have ever been introduced. No one expects everything to be adopted, but but with all these suggestions being past on to the development team, it would be nice if the development team gave the forum a little feedback.