Problem with "Places" usage

[Gregg]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

This is true, at least as far as inconsistencies are concerned. Buggy issues, like an occupation turning up in the place list, are a little more sinister.

An occupation entered into the place field of an event will show in the places list, this is expected behavior.

[theKiwi]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

An occupation entered into the place field of an event will show in the places list, this is expected behavior.

And it's something that Family Tree Maker in particular is very good at doing.

Roger

[Nick]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

An occupation entered into the place field of an event will show in the places list, this is expected behavior.

Yes of course, but the whole point is, I never entered an occupation into a place field! I'm very particular about my place fields and maintain them to perfection. What I found was that, after conversion to v.10, there were several occupations included in the place list. On examining the usage, several individuals had a new field appended to their events: *New[OCCU]. In some, this field duplicated the occupation in the facts field, and in others, it had substituted the occupation in the facts field, leaving the occupation field blank.

There were some 6 or 7 persons involved (out of over 20'000), and it was easy to revert them and then delete the offending new field. I am surprised at being the only Reunion user to have experienced this, but I have a feeling that many more will have experienced this bug, but they probably haven't yet gone through their places yet.

[theKiwi]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

With the exception of 1 extra place in my Reunion 10 file, brought about because the Places List in Reunion 10 now properly includes non-standard Family/Couple places (I had added an Alternate Marriage Event to several couples), the places lists from my Reunion 9 file, and after conversion to Reunion 10 are identical.

Roger

[Mark]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

I found was that, after conversion to v.10, there were several occupations included in the place list. On examining the usage, several individuals had a new field appended to their events: *New[OCCU].

Did you convert to Reunion 10 by exporting a GEDCOM from Reunion 9 and importing it into Reunion 10?

Alternatively, have you imported a GEDCOM at some point (either in Reunion 9 or 10) that the individuals in question came from?

[Nick]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

Did you convert to Reunion 10 by exporting a GEDCOM from Reunion 9 and importing it into Reunion 10?

Alternatively, have you imported a GEDCOM at some point (either in Reunion 9 or 10) that the individuals in question came from?

Very unlikely Mark, and if so it would have been many years ago, well before Reunion 9. On the other hand, I can safely say that my Reunion 9 place list was absolutely "clean" because I go through it regularly ensuring there are no duplicates of any kind. Had there been an intruding occupation in it it would have stuck out like a daisy on the centre court at Wimbledon...

It seems I have been the victim of a weird bug whose effects have been happily small and which I have been able to eliminate easily. As far as I'm concerned the issue is over, but it's just as well that you Leister folks know about it.

[fjvanbodegom]

Re: Problem with "Places" usage

But it is not logic that you are the only person.
Go to field usage in your 'old Reunion 9 familyfile' and check if the field *New [OCCU] is present there. (Preferences -> Fields -> Field Usage, you can sort it on name)
If this field is there, than it is an old remnant of an earlier import. Otherwise your finding cannot be explained.

[Nick]

*** I was wrong! There is no bug... ***

Leister had an old family file of mine, and Frank has shown me that there were indeed some glitches in the places/occupations fields. I suppose these were not apparent in the Reunion 9 place list, but were lurking deep in the data like some herpes virus, and came up when Reunion 10 arrived.

Frank was kind enough to send me a private email, saying he didn't want to humiliate me on the forum, but I would like to make a public apology for stating that there was a bug in Reunion 10, and unintentionally denigrating the application I love best in the world! There is no bug and I'm sorry to have wasted everyone's time because of my own incompetence.

Nick Michael (beating breast)

[Peter Cook]

Re: *** I was wrong! There is no bug... ***

There is no bug and I'm sorry to have wasted everyone's time because of my own incompetence.

Nick Michael (beating breast)

I have found the *New[OCCU] field in my converted file, so this this thread has not been a waste of time for me.