TMG-L ArchivesArchiver > TMG > 2001-08 > 0996947633
From: Richard Brogger <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Suggestion for TMG
Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2001 12:53:53 -0500
Hi Marty and other newcomers,
Your suggestion is a common reoccurring event on this list. The
form of the suggestion varies but the central theme is the same,
some means of placing events in a logical order in the Person view.
Many feel that chronological order is logical. Some might argue
that similar events should be grouped. I actually would prefer a
combination of the two schemes with a means to toggle from one type
of sort to the other. A recent suggestion was that we be allowed to
move events up or down and based on our arrangement, TMG would
assign sort dates to maintain our chosen order.
John Cardinal has provided a utility that will enter sort dates
based on assumptions. His program actually has several utilities
and I recommend that everyone take a look. John has paid attention
to suggestions from TMG users and provided a means to achieve some
of the things users have asked for.
Bob Velke does not have time to read every message on TMG-L but I
can assure you that good suggestions do come to his attention. Many
of the changes to TMG are the result of suggestions from users but I
can assure you that he is not swayed by old arguments he has
rejected time and again. TMG is very versatile and the versatility
brings with it complexity. The complexity of TMG makes it harder to
learn and users complain about that. Bob can't add every wish to
TMG without adding even more complexity so Bob must be very picky
about what is added. Present your idea and how to implement it
without treading on existing or requested features and you may get
Bob to consider the change. But, why spend a lot of time making a
suggestion for a change to TMG 4.x?
We need to make suggestions for TMG 5. I would suggest describing
exactly what results you want to achieve, how to achieve those
results and what the benefits will be to TMG users. Win the
consensus of other users and the suggestion may be included in TMG
5.0 or 5.x.
In a message I quoted from yesterday, Bob listed some of the
features that will be in TMG5. Having seen some of what is in FTST,
I can't guess whether what you suggest will even apply to TMG5.
Maybe we will be able to drag and drop events into any order we
want. I don't know.
I have long used and recommended that FTM users assign circa dates
for every event. The concept still applies in TMG. If the best one
can estimate is plus or minus 50 years, it is still better than
nothing. In assigning estimated dates, one should look carefully at
the dates for an earlier and/or later generations or the dates for
another line in the same country. Some time spent studying what is
known can often help find the answers for that which is unknown and
for me a good estimated date is a big help. Since most of the
events in my data had real dates or estimated dates, I had no
problem when I switched to TMG. My events sorted in the proper
order because I had given each event enough consideration to assign
my best estimate of when it occurred. More often then not, I use
sort dates to force an arrangement that is not chronological.
I have listed some alternatives, I am sure there are others, but if
you are sure your suggestion is just what TMG needs, you need to
fine tune it a lot if you want Bob to pay attention to it.
|Re: [TMG] Suggestion for TMG by Richard Brogger <>|