I have recently been giving some thought to trimming off some distant relatives, to lessen the burden of constantly getting matches for them that add no new information.
I'm referring to people separated by three or four marriages as well as distance - e.g. the cousin of the father of the husband of the sister of the husband of the sister of the daughter of a fourth cousin's aunt's husband's brother.
I regret having added them to the tree in the first place!
Now in the main page of FTB, I can see a column at the left that indicates a relationship as a single number, which is great, but I find it not very useful, because a "12" might indicate something like the above (which I would like to trim), or a direct ancestor 12 generations ago (which is important).
I would really like to have some way of distinguishing between the two situations - maybe something as simple as a negative sign or a "d" in front of a direct ancestor's number of steps?
There is really no point in having a "Back to matches" link at the top left of the page. The way this works is that, from the matches page, we select a matcfh, and wait for download to go to the match detail page. We then select 'confirm' or 'reject' pm each match, and then have to go back to the matches page (and wait to download up to 50 matches) before being able to go to the next match.
It would make a lot more sense to have a "Go to next match" link instead of a "Back to matches" link, or if you worry that some actually want to use up their download allowance going back to the matches page, then have both.
Having a "Next Match" link would (a) speed up checking matches, (b) reduce download time, (c) impact less on your computer server.
Another issue I have is that I am probably missing out on extra information. I might have, for example, a date with the year only, and get a match to someone who has the day and month. Unfortunately, the match only indicates a year so I don't find out. I have given up loading the comparison page - it just takes too long for too little benefit on most matches. It would be of great help if the match somehow indicated that there was extra information available, even if it did not actually duisplay the information.
Los ciudadanos hispanos y portugueses tenemos dos apellidos, uno de parte de nuestro padre y el otro de nuestra madre. Con eso quiero decir que, por tanto, estaría muy bien que, cuando introdujéramos el país de procedencia de los miembros de nuestra familia se estableciera por defecto que (1) las mujeres no tenemos "apellido de casada" ni "apellido de soltera", pues mantenemos nuestros apellidos toda la vida, y que (2), en vez de haber una sola casilla para "el" apellido, hubiera dos casillas para cada uno de nuestros apellidos y que, de tal forma, el primer de los apellidos se sucediera en cadena hereditaria.
Ptovide an additional reconnect function in the visual pane. Where I can drop a connection and connect to parents, there should be a reconnect with the same parent, but together with (a later added) parent.
Provide a fold editing in the visual tree pane, so that children can be collapsed into a single fold (named "children") and the rest of the tree is visually better navigable.
(if you know fold editors in programming, it is the same just visually and horizontally)
Please provide, from time to time, feedback in the forums. (It is called CRM). By just ignoring posts, we - as your customers - do not get a good feeling, just being a cash cow.
Add a record symbol to the links between people in the treeview, if the record provides information between two or more people. (So we can easily check whether we need more documents to be found).
Or, display a thicker line for the relationsships underpinned with a record match.
Those recors are typically birth information (parent-child); or marriages.
Situation: in Smart Search results, there is a list of matches with persons on left and right side.
Suggestion: change layout of search results slightly so that the text starting with the year of birth, the names of rrelated people starts below the image. Do not move, however, the statement which says about the relation I have to that person.
Consequence is, that you have
1) bigger text lines with less names broken from line to line
2) can arrange same names on the same visible line, which imrpoves seeing differences
If needed, contact me for a screenshot including the suggestion
1) Provide a filtering mechanism that can be switched on and off for search, so that only my direct ancestors are shown in a search (I call it the "V" pattern - with me at the lower end of the letter
2) Provide a filtering mechanism that can be switched on and off for search, so that only my direct ancestors and their direct descendants are shown in a search (I call it the "M" pattern - with me at the lower end of the letter and the descendants of my ancestors either in V or in M )
Could look this also like a
case 1) inverted pyramid
case 2) convey hull of pyramdis with the top of each pyramid in case 1)
Reason for that: otherwise, the tree grows to an unmanagable size. I have things like "the third cousin of the brother of my grandfathers father bla bla..." which shifts the focus from my ancestors to whomever...
I'd find it useful to have an option to either lock an individual record or to mark it as complete. If I've done exhausted the research and compiled the record with as accurate data as possible, I'd like to be able to designate it as such. That would make it less likely to corrupt the record with information coming in from Smart Matches and Discoveries. If not locked, then even just a little lock icon on the person's picture, like the black ribbon for deceased individuals.
It would be nice to have an option to allow marking a connection line (link between two people) as an uncertain connection that requires further proof (for example by selecting a dashed line instead of solid line). After enough evidence is accumulated, a user can choose to convert the connection type to a permanent one (solid line). By keeping the solid line as default, there won't be any side effects for existing trees.
Also it would be nice to be able to add notes to the connection line (link) itself, where one can explain the deduction leading to the link and what is still missing.
I like many of the report features of Family Tree Builder, but there is one format of report I have not been able to find. If I use the "Descendants" report, I get a detailed report of the family tree by generations, with full details of birth, marriage, and death. If I use the "Descendant Summary" report, I get a family tree report with each descendant listed under his/her parents with birth and death dates and marriage dates if present, but no places.
What I really would like is a descendants' report similar to other genealogy programs I have used before. The format is something like this:
1 Ancestor 1 b. 1854 New York, NY d. 1945 Chicago, IL
Wife of Ancestor 1 b. 1857 New York, NY d. 1932 Chicago, IL m. 1885 New York, NY
2 Child 1 of Ancestor 1 b. 1888 New York, NY d. 1951 Boston, MA
Wife of Child 1 of Ancestor 1 b. 1890 New York, NY d. 1960 Cambridge, MA m. 1910 New York, NY
3 Child 1 of Child 1 of Ancestor 1 b. 1911 New York, NY d. 1970 Detroit, MI
Husband of Child 1 of Child 1 of Ancestor 1 b. 1908 Brooklyn, NY d. 1942 Detroit, MI m. 1934 New York, NY
3 Child 2 of Child 1 of Ancestor 1 b. 1913 New York, NY d. 1940 New York, NY
Wife of Child 2 of Child 1 of Ancestor 1 b. 1913 New York, NY d. 1980 New York, NY m. 1935 New York, NY
2 Child 2 of Ancestor 1 b. 1895 New York, NY d. 1981 Kansas City, MO
Wife of Child 2 of Ancestor 1 b. 1897 New York, NY d. 1991 Kansas City, MO m. 1920 New York, NY
3 Child 1 of Child 2 of Ancestor 1 b. 1921 Kansas City, MO d. 2008 Las Vegas, NV
Second wife of Child 2 of Ancestor 1:
Wife 2 of Child 2 of Ancestor 1 b. 1901 Chicago, IL d. 1986 Los Angeles, CA m. 1945 Chicago, IL
3 Child 2 of Child 2 of Ancestor 1 b. 1947 Chicago, IL
3 Child 3 of Child 2 of Ancestor 1 b. 1951 Chicago, IL
You get the idea...
This kind of descendants' report has the detail of the first report I described with the linear format of the second. Just thought I'd propose this idea.
He estado añadiendo la dirección en mi propia persona en el Family tree Builder. Todo correcto. Sin embargo, esta dirección de mi grupo familiar sólo se añade a mi persona y no al resto de miembros de mi familia, por lo que para que aparezca en cada uno de los miembros es preciso añadirla a cada uno de ellos. ¿No sería posible que al añadir una dirección en una persona nos pregunte si queremos añadir al grupo familiar y a qué miembros del grupo familiar queremos añadir la dirección? Creo que sería una función muy útil y no me parece difícil de implemntar.
Perdón por no poderla haber puesto en inglés pero mi pobre inglés haría que quedase pobremente expresado.
Un saludo y gracias por vuestro apoyo y comprensión
1. I am getting emails for Smart Matches for people who are not in my family tree.
2. Smart Matches icon on the title bar no longer displays number of matches to be confirmed, or otherwise.
3. List of Matching Family Site now broken into two lists: one showing a minimal list of sites for which match confirmed; the other showing outstanding matches. A View All expands the list but this is not satisfactory.
4. List displaying outstanding matches has people that are not or ever been in my family tree. A Compare Tree shows these people in my on line tree. They are not in my PC-based tree and some have never been.
Had to telephone to get a response. Seems these problems may be connected to multiple trees with the same name - no solution as to why these multiple trees were created by MyHeritage.
I see that you have flag images in a small size for use in website etc. As an option in FTB, where there is no personal photo, as well as the options for placeholder, blank, etc, I would like to see an option where the flag of country of birth is displayed. If this option is selected, then where there is no photo (i.e. most people prior to the 1880s), the flag would appear instead of a blank or placeholder.
Alternatively, could there be a better way of attaching a photo to multiple people, so I could insert the photo of a flag once, and then link it to lots of people - the cuurent "associations" process is too time-consuming for this use - for each new person to be attched to that flag, I would have to go to the original persons, select the photo, open the associate tab, locate the person I want to attach, associate them, then adjust the blue box to fit the flag better.
Copyright © 2016 MyHeritage Ltd.