Search for content in message boards

Wish I had signed up for the beta

Replies: 35

Re: Wish I had signed up for the beta

Posted: 23 Aug 2013 2:30PM GMT
Classification: Query
Edited: 23 Aug 2013 2:43PM GMT

You missed my point, you probably missed most of my previous posts in this thread so I'll try to sum them up so you will understand.

1) you said: "Just because you don't use the AKA fact doesn't mean it shouldn't exist." As I said in one of my previous posts in this thread, I DO USE AKA!! AKA is a type of NAME, I add every AKA as an additional name with a TYPE of "aka". FTM ignors my TYPE designation. This is wrong, FTM should follow the GEDCOM specification for NAME. see this post:

2) An "indexed name" is not the same as a "preferred name", FTM uses the terms incorrectly. A person can only have one preferred name, just like you can have only one preferred phone number. You can have many phone numbers you can only have one preferred number for me to call, the others are "alternate numbers". However I can (or should be allowed) to add any number of phone numbers to your list of numbers to call. The preferred one is the first one you should call.

3) Married name should also be indexed. I also set a TYPE of "married" when I add the name to my database.

4) Nickname should also be indexed. In my database it is.

5) All names for a specific person should be given the opportunity to be indexed. I should have control of what data is indexed. see here for additional names I index:

I hope you now understand why the aka "fact" should go away. If you don't please help me to understand what you don't understand.

EDIT: You can also read in this post about my thoughts on name index:
SubjectAuthorDate Posted
chris_rickaby 23 Aug 2013 5:06PM GMT 
kj_norway 23 Aug 2013 8:30PM GMT 
silverfox3280 20 Aug 2013 5:29PM GMT 
kj_norway 21 Aug 2013 2:34AM GMT 
dmossfritch 21 Aug 2013 2:59AM GMT 
kj_norway 21 Aug 2013 3:24AM GMT 
per page

Find a board about a specific topic