|
|
|
|
Customers
GenoPro version: 2.0.1.4
Last Login: Tuesday, September 27, 2022
Posts: 64,
Visits: 5,071
|
I have noticed an oddity in the Report Writer (Export to Gedcom). I
have a number of "source" records associated with individuals that
include a URL in the "Comments" field such as :
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1851&h=12079223&ti=5538&indiv=try
when this is written to gedcom it is truncated as follows :
----------------------
0 @ind00001@ INDI
1 NAME Ellen /Gorse/
2 GIVN Ellen
2 SURN Gorse
1 SOUR @source2768538212@
2 PAGE Class: HO107; Piece: 2259; Folio: 563; Page: 1; GSU roll:
87282-87283.
2 NOTE
ttp://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1851&h=12079223&ti=5538&indiv=try
0 @source2768538212@ SOUR
1 TITL 1851 England Census @@ Class: HO107; Piece: 2259; Folio: 563; Page: 1; GSU roll: 87282-87283.
1 PUBL Publisher: - Provo, UT, USA: The Generations Network, Inc., 2005. - Census Returns of England and Wales, 1851. Kew, Surrey, England: The National Archives of the UK (TNA): Public Record Office (PRO), 1851. Data imaged from the National
2 CONC Archives, London, England. The
1 AUTH Ancestry.com
1 NOTE http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1851&h=12079223&ti=5538&indiv=try
2 CONT
2 CONT This source is subordinate to Source S2305677654
--------------------------------
As you can see the initial "h" of "http" has been dropped from the NOTE in the INDI record although it is written correctly in the SOUR record.
It is not clear though why the same information needs to be written to both the INDI record and to the SOUR record which is referenced by the INDI record.
BobC
|
|
|
|
|
Administrators
Customers
Important Contributors
FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com
GenoPro version: 3.1.0.1
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:27 PM
Posts: 3,428,
Visits: 26,567
|
Thanks for reporting this bobC. There is an obvious error in the code and I will correct it in the next release. I can't imagine why I coded it like that in the first place! For now you can change line 672 in gedcom.js from if (strNotes) this.multiline('NOTE', level+1, strNotes.substr(1));
|
to if (strNotes) this.multiline('NOTE', level+1, strNotes);
|
As to why the comment appears twice is a little more difficult to explain. The GenoPro 'SourceCitation' object can, as its name suggests, be an amalgam of both a Source and a citation of that Source. Gedcom as I understand it treats these differently. I needed to split these where a combination occurs when exporting to Gedcom. If GenoPro WhereInSource, ConfidenceLevel or QuotedText are present, I assume it is a citation of a source. Also if any of Title, Subtitle, Description, Series/Name/Issue, Edition, Editor, MediaType, Publication/Publisher/Date/Place are present as well then I assume a combination of citation and source, as in your example. The question is what to do with the notes? It is not possible to determine where they belong so I output the notes on both citation and source. You can avoid this by using 'hierarchic' Sources in GenoPro with the child 'Source' being used only for the citation, ie not containing any of the Source fields listed above.
'lego audio video erro ergo disco' or "I read, I listen, I watch, I make mistakes, therefore I learn"
|
|
|
|
|
Customers
GenoPro version: 2.0.1.4
Last Login: Tuesday, September 27, 2022
Posts: 64,
Visits: 5,071
|
Ron,
Thanks for the response - It isn't a big issue for me but I work on the
principle that if I had an error in my work I'd like to know about it.
I understand the dilemma you have with "where should this go" !
The file I was working with which showed this up was a gedcom sent to me
by someone who had created it using one of the on-line services. The
result is an absolute mess of interlinked sources - parent and child
which are difficult to extract any meaningful data from anyway. TBH I
try to keep my own source info simple and refer to most things by notes,
as otherwise important stuff gets lost in the depths of nested source
records.
Bob
|