Search for content in message boards

Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Posted: 9 Oct 2012 6:34AM GMT
Classification: Query
I have found that when generating a descendant report using NGSQ numbering in FTM2012 that the NGSQ number assignment generator algorithm "uses up" extra numbers when there is a child from a marriage of first cousins. In essence, the algorithm appears to assign two numbers for the child, when traversing the tree from the common ancestor. In the descendant report, the first of the two numbers is reported for the child, however the second number goes unused in the report. The problem is compounded if the child from the marriage of first cousins has further children as more NGSQ numbers go unused for each of them too (and so on). This "bug" can cause difficulties when comparing reports generated from earlier versions (such as from FTM around 2005) in which the software properly detected this condition and did not "use up" extra number assignments. Is there a workaround?

David

Re: Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Posted: 9 Oct 2012 11:48AM GMT
Classification: Query
Try compacting your file

What happens?

John D

Re: Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Posted: 10 Oct 2012 12:29AM GMT
Classification: Query
Edited: 10 Oct 2012 12:32PM GMT
I'm not seeing what you are seeing. What I am seeing is that both cousins are in the report. The children appear under the first one with numbers appropriately assigned. Then, the kids are duplicated under the second spouse, but with the same number that was used for them under the first spouse.

From that point, only the child's descendants are shown. The Line of Descent only shows the first parent's line and not the second - and there is no indication there is another ancestor up above unless you happen to follow the number and see it appears twice in the register report.


Look again. I'm pretty sure you will find the numbers are NOT skipped. They only appear that way because the second cousin to appear uses the first cousin's kids' numbers.

[Edit from original post: the report skips printing the second set of numbers the descendants would otherwise have and print the numbers assigned under the first parent. This is because subseqent generations will have numbers coming from the first parent.]

This same behavior happens to all of the register reports.

In olden days, before computers, this part of a published genealogy in a book would simply say "see husband's number xx for the descendants of this couple"

Edited.

Re: Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Posted: 10 Oct 2012 12:54AM GMT
Classification: Query
"In olden days, before computers, this part of a published genealogy in a book would simply say "see husband's number xx for the descendants of this couple"

Some software programs give you the option. I know TMG used to have that feature but haven't used it in a long time.


Re: Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Posted: 10 Oct 2012 5:32AM GMT
Classification: Query
I successfully compacted the file and ran the report again. There was no change. The report still skipped a number. Please see my response to the other posts in this thread.

Re: Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Posted: 10 Oct 2012 6:02AM GMT
Classification: Query
Thank you for the reply. However, the problem still exists. To clarify, here is an example of what I am getting:

Note that Edith Smith and Henry Jones are first cousins from common ancestor used to generate this descendant report.

73. Edith Smith ….. married Henry Jones……. [First entry for one of the first cousins]

Henry Jones and Edith Smith had the following child:

+218 i. Melvin Jones…..

Later in the report…..

79. Elmer Fud ….. married …….

Elmer Fud and …. had the following child:

+238 i. Son Fud…..

80. Henry Jones ….. married Edith Smith……. [Second entry for the other of the first cousins]

Henry Jones and Edith Smith had the following child:

+218 i. Melvin Jones…..

81. Daniel Lee …. married ……

Daniel Lee and ….. had the following child:

+240 i. Tom Lee…..

Nobody in the report is numbered 239. I suspect the number 239 was internally assigned to the “second” instance of Melvin Jones, but then the software recognized that Melvin was really number 218. So number 239 goes unused for the entire report. Similarly, other numbers go unused for children of number 218 due to the same software behavior. FTM circa 2005 properly handled this in the descendant report and did not skip 239 or numbers associated with the children.

Re: Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Posted: 10 Oct 2012 12:28PM GMT
Classification: Query
Edited: 10 Oct 2012 2:19PM GMT
I see what you are saying. I was able to duplicate this behavior.

I don't know what the NGSQ rules are in this case. Nor do I know if this "quirk" is caused by software considerations, ie that a number has to be assigned to that "slot" in the tree because of software considerations and it doesn't print because it would be confusing to print both numbers.

After all, the numbers were not skipped, they were simply not printed - because the individuals have two numbers in the "organization chart" of the report. One set of numbers under each parent.

I see this as a "no harm, no foul" type of situation.

The bigger problem, as I see it, is not putting the reader on notice that the progeny have this "dual-status" and disclosing the cousin status of the parents. I would like to see a statement in plain English that the partner is a cousin and is located at Number xx in the report.

Re: Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Posted: 11 Oct 2012 11:48PM GMT
Classification: Query
I created a descendant report that included the marriage of second cousins, Josiah Matlack and Sarah Ellis. Sarah’s mother was Amy Matlack.

Amy Matlack was number 14. Two of her children, Levi Ellis and Sarah Ellis were numbered 28. Number 27 was skipped. When I go further down in the report Levi is 27 and Sarah is 28. This is the only place I could find a problem with the numbering.

Curt

per page

Find a board about a specific topic

  • Visit our other sites:

© 1997-2014 Ancestry.com | Corporate Information | Privacy | Terms and Conditions