Ancestry.com - "Old" Search update

I received this email from Ancestry.com and wanted to share it with you:

Russ

 

Good evening,

 

In an effort to continually improve your experience on Ancestry.com, we are asking for feedback on our search function. Our plan is first to gather feedback from our core users. We will take all of that feedback into account when we are merging the functionality of Old Search and current search into a consolidated search experience.

 

You can take the survey here: http://ancestry.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8ubNXU8IiQcxqVD

 

Many of the recent concerns and comments have cited functionality that actually exists in current search, as well as in old search – specifically:

 

1. Our current search experience allows users to view search results as a list of ranked records or as a consolidated list of categories.
2. Our current search experience allows users to do “Exact Match” searches.
3. Our current search experience allows users to specify a “Collection Priority” to filter results by country.

Crista Cowan has a great educational video which demonstrates this functionality in the current search experience:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c423yU5Ccs0

We also have a helpful article which does a side-by-side explanation of how to achieve the same types of results with the current search as in Old Search: http://ancestry.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/5569/kw/old

Thank you,

The Ancestry.com Product Team

Ancestry.com - Upcoming Search Changes

I received this posting from Ancestry.com. What I haven't done yet, is to see if there is any impact on Family Tree Maker 2012 with this new search. IF there are any impacts, I'll post a follow up message here.

Ancestry.com is continuing our efforts to improve the search experience across Ancestry.com and will be making changes to our search functionality in the upcoming months. Some features will be added and some will be discontinued. As part of the 2% of our subscribers that use the old search function on the site, we know that you are passionate about the search experience on Ancestry.com and we are reaching out to you to get input on potential improvements. We hope you will take the opportunity to share your insights and feedback on our plans.

To identify which areas of the experience we should focus on this year, we have drawn on customer input, usage data, usage patterns and our old search function for inspiration. From all of that, we are looking at making your time on Ancestry.com more productive by improving these areas of the search experience in 2013:

• More relevant search results with the best results at the top
• Easier refining and control of your search results
• Keeping a better history of the work you have done
• Publishing more new content and more corrections to existing content
• Performance improvements to return results faster

As we begin to make these improvements, we will no longer maintain two separate search systems for the site. Maintaining two systems limits the resources we can use to make improvements and increases the complexity of every improvement we try to make. Additionally, continuing to maintain the two systems limits our ability to direct more investment into other areas like adding more record collections and correcting existing collections.

Based on that, as a part of the work this year we will be bringing together the two search experiences into a single search experience on Ancestry.com. We hope to bring forward the best features of both the old and new search systems into the consolidated experience to facilitate the transition for our users and to improve the overall search experience. We expect to discontinue the old search function as a separate experience within the next 6 months.

As a user of the old search feature, we wanted to give you advance notice and let you influence the changes we are making in search. Please take this survey to share your feedback and ideas on key features to improve.

Best regards,
The Ancestry.com Product Team

Evidentia Export to FTM2012 Import - Ancestry Member Tree

Continuing the used of a GEDCOM file, created from Evidentia, I wanted to see how it shows up in an Ancestry Member Tree.

To show the Options for Exporting from Evidentia:

and a summary of the above screen into FTM2012 and where that data goes (below)

In:

Evidentia Export to FTM2012 Import - Person Reports

I thought that using the option of Exporting the Analysis of the claims from a document into the Fact Notes, and the Conclusion into the Research Notes for that person would work for me. In the Person Workspace, Person View, selecting the Fact Notes tab, and the Research Notes tab, I could see my analysis and conclusion on the same screen. That works of me, on my computer. BUT what happens when I put upload that file into my Ancestry Member Tree.

I go to the Ancestry Member Tree (AMT) for this person and the Fact and Sources tab, Selecting Source Citation, I don't see either the Analysis information, nor the Conclusion.

So, what worked for my on the screen, will not work on the AMT.

Looking back to the FTM2012 Reports option:

Evidentia Export to FTM2012 Import - Fields

Where the Analysis of the Claims were in the Citation Text field, in the Sources Workspace and the Conclusion in the Person Notes field now looks like this in the AMT.

I see the Analysis in the Source Citation, Citation Information under Transcription of text. Not sure the heading it right, but the analysis is there. Noticing the "View Note" is showing up on the upper menu, I can see the Conclusion.

The Analysis and Conclusion are both present in the Ancestry Member Tree.

Bottom line here, What works in the AMT does not work, for me, within FTM2012. Here is why:

Although on the Screen, Sources workspace, the EndNotes are confusing, in that they are at the end of the Citation information. On Screen it looks like this:

The Analysis can be controlled with the Check Mark in the "include in Reference Note" on this screen. But in doing so, that is unchecking that box, would keep the analysis from being displayed in the AMT.

It comes down to Who is the audience for the Analysis and Conclusion work that was done in Evidentia.

Here is a summary of what I have tried to describe:

This shows where the Analysis and Conclusions, done in Evidentia, appear in a Person Report, a Source Report, and in the Ancestry Member Tree, and what workspace and tab the data will appear.

If you use Evidentia, and I AM using it, WE each need to evaluate where the Analysis and Conclusions appear within the Program, How or IF we want that work to appear when generating reports from within Family Tree Maker, and how it is presented in an Ancestry Member Tree.

I have not found one solution that works everywhere. If I exclude the impact on an Ancestry Member Tree, I know which one I am going to use in my working file, but will see if there is another solution for the AMT.


_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2013 by H R Worthington

Evidentia Export to FTM2012 Import - Person Reports

Continuing the with my leaning Evidentia and how to use that data in Family Tree Maker, I posted Evidentia Export to FTM2012 Import - Fields earlier. To summarize what information is generated from Evidentia, and what Files are used in FTM2012, and in what Workspace do you find that informat:

That is the import or data entry view of the data.

Any time I start something new, or decide how I want to handle some specific information or how I format my information I look at the output before I make my decision. Meaning I test "stuff" out first, a test file or two.

In my previous post, I suggested that the Analysis of the Claim would be in the Citation Text field, in the Source Workspace, and that the Proof Conclusion would go into the Research Notes. That allows me to concentrate on my sources and my analysis of the claims in that source, all in one place. Since the Conclusion is more about the Person, the Research Note would be the place to put my Conclusion. Over time, that Research Note would have all of the Conclusions of all of the claims that I had found and analysed.

There are two places where we can generate a report what has options to include the Claim Analysis and the Proof Conclusion. For this blog post, I won't go through the 15 different configurations, but will show the one that appears to work best for me.

In the Publish Workspace, Person Collection, Individual Report, with Notes on, in the Items to Include option screen, we see this:

That looks OK, as the Research Notes are provided, but the Claim Analysis is NOT present. In my earlier post, I had turned the Citation Notes field OFF, as I thought it was confusing to me.

I returned to the Sources Workspace and put a check mark in the Citation Text in the Reference Note box. Now the "sources" part of the report looks like this:

That is an example of why I thought the information in the EndNote / Reference Note was confusing. I can't tell where the Citation leaves off the Claim Analysis begins.

Back to the drawing board, for me.

I then looked at having the Conclusion in the Research Notes and the Analysis in the Fact Notes field and ran the same report.

In this report, I can see the Proof Conclusion first, followed by each Fact and its Claim Analysis. That looks great for me.

The difference now is that all of the review for this person, including the Claim Analysis will be in the People Workspace, Person View.

On one screen, I can now see what was done in Evidentia for this Claim / Fact. The Analysis on the right and the conclusion on the left, in the Research Notes.

That works for me, so far, as I don't have to turn options on or off, for a report. The report, for me at this point, is complete and I can see everything for that fact / claim in one place, on one screen.

More to follow. Don't think I done yet, as there may be more things to consider


_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2013 by H R Worthington

Evidentia Export to FTM2012 Import - Fields

I recently did a blog post about Evidentia, a document or source based genealogy program. Evidentia Export to Family Tree Maker by a GEDCOM file


Here are the options we are given in Evidentia. We get there from the Reports Menu, AFTER you have done your data entry into Evidentia, handled the claims, linked claims to subjects, Analyzed the Claims, and wrote your Proof Conclusion.

The choices are:

Evidentia Claims Analysis to Citation Note Citation Data Event/Fact Note Separate Event/Fact per Claim Person Note Evidentia Proof Conclusion to  Fact Note Person Note Master Note

Here is the Evidentia Screen.

I am not going to explain these fields here, as there are many resources to learn this program.

There are at least 15 options available here. Evidentia makes a best effort to target the GEDCOM field that will result in the requested field location when it is imported. However, where the field is imports is ultimately at the discretion of the program you are importing into.

After some testing, here is where that data will appear in Family Tree Maker version 2012.


Evidentia Claims Analysis..........FTM2012.........................Workspace
Citation Note....................................Citation Note....................Source
Citation Data....................................Citation Text.....................Source
Fact Note..........................................Fact Note..........................People, Person View
Event per Claim...............................Citation Note.....................Source
Person Note.....................................Person Note......................People, Person View

Evidentia Proof Conclusion......FTM2012...........................Workspace
Fact Note.........................................Fact Note............................People, Person View
Person Note....................................Person Note........................People, Person View
Master Note.....................................Person Research Log.......People, Person View

So, there are options on how we want the presented as we work with our family file. I do strongly recommend that you create a NEW Family Tree Maker file, until you see how the data looks to you and where you want to find it.

You will note the the Proof Conclusion will ONLY appear in the People.Workspace, so it depends on where you want to find that statement.

There are other things to consider and that is Output or Reports. I will post a follow up to that in future blog posts.

On other item, specially if you are using the online Ancestry Member Tree (TreeSync™ feature). There are a couple of FTM2012 fields that do not currently appear in an AMT.

• Citation Notes
• Fact Notes
• Research Logs

So, the Claim Analysis in the Citation Notes and Event per Claim would not appear in an AMT. Fact Notes would also not work in the AMT. Proof Conclusion statements wouldn't work if "Master Note" was chosen.

In the Source Workspace, the Claim Analysis in the Citation Date, will be put into the Citation Text field, on the Citation Screen. It's great to see it there on that screen, BUT, I found the Reference Note, which becomes EndNotes, became very confusing. However, there is a check mark to turn the the Citation Text OFF for the Reference Note or EndNote. It depends on where you want to see your Claim Analysis.

Bottom line, it's up to you to determine where to find the information from Evidentia.

My initial favorite was to import the Claim Analysis into the Fact Notes because I would be looking at the Person View, reviewing the Fact and see that I have Citation information and that there is information in the Fact Notes field.

But I might want to use the Claim Analysis into the Citation Text, and turn OFF the include Citation Text option. At first, I didn't like the way the EndNotes looked in the reports. Then I remembered the ability to turn the Citation Text off in the EndNote.

Since Evidentia is a Source Based program, that might be the better option to choose. In the Source Workspace, my focus would be source focused. So, this is my current favorite.

For the Proof Conclusion, my preference would be to be in the Research Notes. The option, for consideration would be the Person Notes. I use the later for "stories" and not the result of my research. There may be other considerations when the AMT and Reports are reviewed.

The results that I saw using the Separate Event/Fact per claim option, were not what I wanted in my database. That option may work for other genealogy programs, but I didn't find it helpful for Family Tree Maker.

The output evaluation and interaction with an Ancestry Member Tree will follow.

_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2013 by H R Worthington

Evidentia Export to Family Tree Maker by a GEDCOM file

GPS, Assertions, Conclusions, Analysis are terms that I have been struggling with in doing my family research. Earlier this year, a new software program was made available, Evidentia. This is a link for more information about the program: http://evidentia.ed4becky.net/

I have blogged about Evidentia on another blog that I have where I have talked about this program.

https://worthy2be.wordpress.com/tag/evidentia/

Early on, there was talk about the Import and Export of a GEDCOM with that program. With all of the issues surrounding GEDCOM, I put that feature out of my thought process as I learned and have started to use this new program.

A couple of days ago, the program had an update, where the Exporting of a GEDCOM was made available.

Here is a link on how it works, Exporting FROM Evidentia.

Some terms need to be mentioned here that may be unfamiliar to some. I was one of those before Evidentia. The term CLAIM is like a Fact in Family Tree Maker. You start data entry from a Source and that Source Claims some pieced of information, like the birth or age of a person. In FTM2012, we might enter that as a Birth Fact, and attach a Citation to it.

In Evidentia, you document the Claims that the source is presenting and a citation will be generated. In fact, you create a Source, choose a Source Template, like a Template in Family Tree Maker, and a Citation is created for the CLAIMs that you gather from that source.

What Evidentia does, is to walk you though the Analysis of that Claim, then after you have other claims from other sources, you create a Proof Conclusion. You get to this Export feature from the Reports Menu in Evidentia.

In Evidentia, there are several options to choose from, when creating a GEDCOM file.

Export Claim Analysis to:

• Citation Note
• Citation Data
• Event/Fact Note
• Separate Event/Fact per Claim
• Person Note

Export Proof Conclusion to:

• Event/Fact Note
• Person Note
• Master Note

The Subject or Person is selected and Only the chosen subject, with associated claims and sources, will be exported. That is clearly stated on the above screen.

There is also an important note at the bottom of that screen;

Evidentia makes a best effort to target the GEDCOM field that will result in the requested field location when it is imported. However, where the field is imported is ultimately at the discretion of the program you are importing into.

So, what does that mean to Family Tree Maker. The Claim Analysis is pretty clear. Remember that Evidentia walks you through where to enter your Analysis of each Claim. That information can go into the Citation Notes (FTM2012 - Source Workspace, selected Source and Citation, Notes tab); Citation Data (FTM2012 - in the Citation Text); Fact Note (FTM2012 - People Workspace, Person View, Fact Note tab); Separate Fact per Claim (FTM2012 - each fact would be an Alt Fact (another fact); Person Note (FTM2012 - People Workspace, Person vie, Notes)

5 Options on where to put the Claim Analysis.

The Proof Conclusions also have options. In the Fact Note, and it would be with the Claim Analysis, the Person Note would be the Research Note in FTM2012, or the Master Note, the Person Note field.

3 Option on where to put the Proof Conclusions.

Several options, I didn't care for, just by the description and how I enter my data, but the one I liked the best was

Event/Fact Note for the Claim Analysis and the Person Note or Research Notes for that person.

Below you see the Birth Fact is highlighted and that there is a 1 in the 3rd column of numbers, or the Fact Notes tab. What is in that right column is the Birth Claim Analysis.

The Proof Conclusion, is in the Research Notes for that Person.

In the above example, there is only one Fact (Claim) that has been analyzed and only one Proof Conclusion for that person.

So in the Research Log, you would see all of the Proof Conclusions for each Fact that has been analyzed.

On the data entry side, this looks OK for me. But, I don't make a decision only on the input side of Family Tree Maker. I want to see what it will look like, IF I were to share my results, including my analysis.

To the Publish Workspace, and for this example I want to view my claims about the Person, so the Person Reports and Individual Report is selected. Selecting the Items to include (Right Panel, first ICON on the Left) I make the following choices.

Include the Person Notes, Fact Notes, and Research Notes.

The report that is generated shows the Proof Statement under Research Notes, right at the top of the Notes, followed by the Fact Notes. In this case, there are no Person notes.

I would use this report to help prove who this person was and how I came to that conclusion

There are at least 15 options given to us on Importing into Family Tree Maker. I have looked at the other options, and this one will work for me, for now.

There will probably be additional blog posts on Evidentia, as I am only learning about how to use it and how to import it, with only a couple of test cases. I am guessing that there are a number of things to take into consideration on it's use.

This whole process of handling data for me file. It's more then recording the data I find, but that evaluation of that information can be done and imported into Family Tree Maker.

Am I going to update my whole file? Probably not, but I AM starting with my Brick Walls. I already have an Evidentia file on my "brick wall". That is, Who are Capt John's Parents.


Here is a link to a list of Evidentia Resources that I have found.

https://worthy2be.wordpress.com/2013/05/15/evidentia-reference-listing/

Another software program that is now in my Genealogy Research Tool Box.
_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2013 by H R Worthington

FTM2012 and Ancestry Member Tree Hints

Working on a project that was created to track individuals that have been listed in some Pedigree Charts. These charts have been researched, but the documentation was not included in the charts. I do know, that the research has been completed and proven, but I want to have some documentation for these charts.

I am entering the data into FTM2012 and using the TreeSync™ feature to post the same file as an Ancestry Member Tree. I have entered 233 people into my file and wanted to see how the hints / shaky leaves matched up.

The data in this file is very limited as to Facts. 233 people, 67 marriages, 9 generations and 61 Surnames. The date range is 1471 to 1713 with most in the UK. The average Fact per person is 4. That would include the Name, and two identification facts. There are 46 places, again in the UK.

This screen is from FTM2012, Plan Workspace, More File Statistics

In FTM2012, I determined that there were 41 Ancestry Hints for 11 people. 4 of the 41 were for unnamed people.

Ancestry Member Trees (AMT) have a way to see a summary of hints.

In FTM2012, I have the Member Tree feature turned off, so the number of Records in the AMT is very close to that of FTM2012. It will be interesting to see the "Story", but I think that will be on someone's Member Tree.

Bottom line here, is the number of Hints are very, very close. Now to start looking at those hints.


_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2013 by H R Worthington

Exporting to a GEDCOM with unexpected results on Import

Recently, I exported a file to the GEDCOM format. When that file was imported into a 3rd party program, the results were not right. For example, I had an Occupation fact that had a Location. What I saw in the report from the 3rd party program was

Occupation / Location

It should have just been

Location

The issue is in the way the GEDCOM was formatted. The first export was in the GEDCOM 5.5 format, but had selected Version 16, when the type of format was selected. I have used that format for many years. Out of habit I suspect.

To correct the unexpected results, I returned to the File, Export menu.

This brings up a window where you select the format that you want to export the file into. In this case, I selected GEDCOM 5.5, which is seen from the Output Format: pull down menu. 

The default is FTM16, which I had used before, with the unexpected results. From this menu, I will select FTM2012.

With FTM2012 selected, a window will appear to name the GEDCOM file.

This time, the results were correct.

Not all GEDCOMs are equal.



_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2013 by H R Worthington

Creating the Land Record Source Citation

Blogger friend, Randy Seaver, posted Creating the Land Record Source Citation in Family Tree Maker 2012 . I didn't get a chance to reply to him, or to using the Template feature for a Land Record. As it turns out, it is a very timely post, as this record type was talked about in the DearMYRTLE Community in Google+ and on a Hangout on Air. There will be a discussion about these records very soon.

I found Randy's image and here are the steps I took, which are very close to what he had posted. I only used the Name FACT in my database, for this blog post, but wanted to Add this Source and Citation to the Name FACT. So, I clicked on New Sources, on the People Workspace, Person View. The Add Source window opened, where I selected More.... From there, I selected Local and State Records, Property and Probate. As did Randy, Image Copies, Online.

I opened my Evidence Explained to page 494, which would reflect the information at the top of the Select Source Template window.

This brings up the Edit Source screen where I added New York, Erie County, and Aurora. The Record Series was Erie County, New York Deeds, 1844-1850, volumes 78-79, found on Family Search, www.familysearch.org and FamilySearch.org ast the Repository.

For the Citation Detail I entered:

Volume 78, Page 396, Samuel Vaux deed in Aurora, N.Y. from Seth Sprague (Lot 22), accessed 05 Mar 2013; citing New York, Land Records, 1630-1975; Erie Deeds 1844-1850 vol 78-79; Image 184 of 792 

For the Citation Text I left it blank, as there does not appear to be any additional information that  might need.

I did, past the Web address from Family Search, but chose not to include the Citation text nor Web address in the Reference Note.

In the Source Workspace, the Citation Information looks like this.

Wanting to see what the EndNote would look like, I generated an Individual Report in the Publish Workspace.

The data elements are there. The difference, as I have seen before, the order of the jurisdiction is not the same as in Evidence Explained. The FTM2012 templates for location got from smallest to largest. Aurora, Erie (County), New York (State). But this is consistent within Family Tree Maker.
_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2013 by H R Worthington

Cousin Collaboration

I was reading Genea-Blogger Ginger's Blog on her blog. The topic is important, with the topic being collaboration. Please stop by her blog as she makes some important observations.

Genealogy By Ginger's Blog: Downloading Someone Else’s Online Tree and then Uploading it as My Own

One of the nice features of an Ancestry Member Tree (AMT) is that it does allow for collaboration between researchers and cousins. Currently, each AMT has an "owner". The is the person who created that specific tree. AMT's are FREE, but the OWNER has control over who can see what, who can do what, IF anyone can find the AMT.

For example, I have several Ancestry Member Trees online. MY working file is on my computer, in Family Tree Maker Version 2012. That version has the TreeSync™ feature which allows me to maintain the file / tree on my PC, but to also have it Online in an AMT. I do that so that I can access and work on that tree when I am not at my PC at home. The TreeSync feature allows me to work on the AMT (online) then sync that online tree with FTM2012. I can update the tree online or on my PC, AND keep them both in Sync.

This tree, however, is 1) not picked up by Ancestry's search engine, 2) privatized, so that no living persons information can be seen, 3) BUT I can invite someone to see my tree.

Another example, I was doing some research for a colleague of mine, I did the work in FTM2012, uploaded the file to a new, private AMT, and Invited my colleague to see the work that I was doing. There are 3 options for someone who I might invite, 1) view, 2) edit, 3) contribute. Each setting has different capabilities for the person invited. The ability to view some of the data to completely able to update the AMT, just like I would. ALL Online.

This is where the collaboration comes in. It's MY Tree, but my colleague has the same capabilities that I do, when I work online.

As Ginger points out, the file can only be controlled by ONE Computer. That makes sense to me.

The file that I have been collaborating on, with my colleague will ultimately be handed over to this person when they get FTM2012 and are ready to work with the file on their computer. When that happens, I will do a File, Back Up, Back up the file to Dropbox, or File, Export, invite the colleague to do a File, Restore or Copy the file from Dropbox to their own computer.

When that happens, our roles will be reversed. Their AMT and they will make me a contributor, we we go in that direction. I will probably not have to do that, as the research was for them.

Two limitations that I think Ginger is having is 1) One Computer for ONE FTM2012 file, and 2) One FTM2012 file for one AMT. From my testing, the use of Dropbox for the storage of the FILE does not handle the link to the AMT file and the ability to maintain the AMT from the two computers.

Bottom line here, is that I have the ability to collaborate with others, but it's MY file and MY AMT and that I have control. My Sharing of the information that we have collaborated on, is 1) it's online, 2) I can share charts and reports, or 3) I can share the file external to the Family Tree Maker program, but using the features of FTM2012.

As Ginger points out, both the AMT view and the FTM2012 file do NOT contain all of the same information. For example, Comments a user might make on the AMT will NOT be included in the FTM2012 file. At the same time, Fact Notes, Research Notes, Tasks that might appear in FTM2012 will not be included in the AMT view of the same tree/file. Or All of the information in FTM2012 and the AMT will NOT be exactly the same.

As the security settings in AMT provide different levels of information, some of the information is not shared or available on both. A good example would be for Pictures that might be in my FTM2012 file can be marked NOT to appear online. A Find-A-Grave image, that is not mine, I do NOT want to be online, until or unless I had the "owner" of that picture's permission to use it. Another example, in my file I might have a social security number but do NOT want it seen online.

But, what about the Comments or Tasks that are not in both places? For my collaboration project, I generated a ToDo / Task List PDF Report and emailed it to my colleague. So, I CAN share my ToDo list. Although I didn't run into any comments (yet), I would probably incorporate the comments into the Person Notes that IS IN both places, as a comment in the notes. Person Notes, Research Notes, or Fact Notes in FTM2012. Again, making the data / information available in both places.

I appreciate Ginger's blog post that encouraged me to see if I could explain how I handle the Collaboration effort that she it trying to accomplish. Thank you Ginger.


_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © 2013 by H R Worthington