cache tagged persons

[leonard]

Please tell us more about how to use this function. For reporting to various branches of the family I would like to use different tagged sets; however, I've been saving the tagged files as differently named ones. As you can imagine, this makes it difficult to keep everything updated. Can I cache a tagged set, name the cache, and recall it as needed in a single file?
Thanks,
Leonard

[Howard Metcalfe]

Nov 6, 2010 16:15:13 GMT -5 leonard said:

Please tell us more about how to use this function. For reporting to various branches of the family I would like to use different tagged sets; however, I've been saving the tagged files as differently named ones. As you can imagine, this makes it difficult to keep everything updated. Can I cache a tagged set, name the cache, and recall it as needed in a single file?
Thanks,
Leonard

Hi Leonard,

I've never thought of such a use for tags, and nobody else asked for it. The answer is no, the cached tags are marked in a single variable in the individuals' records and I've run out of room for more variables there and the file structure cannot be changed without creating chaos among users with different versions.

In my research, I also follow different branches of my family, so I either record the pivotal person for a branch in the general notes with any comment about where I left off, or more frequently I remember the pivotal persons in the bottom of the Recall menu. I doubt I would ever save separate files since as you note that creates an update nightmare.

Best,
Howard

P.S. The major reason for cached tags is to facilitate complex tagging such as (A or B) and (C or D) where all As and Bs must be intersected with all Cs and Ds.

[leonard]

Could you explain how excactly to use the cached tags? Maybe give a hypothetical example?

Leonard

[Howard Metcalfe]

Nov 6, 2010 20:52:10 GMT -5 leonard said:

Could you explain how excactly to use the cached tags? Maybe give a hypothetical example?

Leonard

Hi Leonard,

Take something like my earlier example. You want to tag people with last names of Smith OR Jones, AND with first names of Mary OR Jane. So you tag only people with the last of Smith. Then you tag people with the last name of Jones but choose the tag mode to Include These People (+). Then you choose More Tag menu > Cache Tagged People.

Now you tag only people with the first name of Mary. Then you tag people with the first name of Jane but choose the tag mode to Include These People (+).

Now you choose More Tag menu > Tag Cached People but choose the tag mode to Exclude Other People (*). The remaining tagged people meet the stated criteria.

There is no way to do this without using the cache for a temporary memory for the last named people. The same thing occurs when you use an RPN (Reverse Polish Notation) calculator for (5 + 8) * (3 +7); The RPN entry 5 8 + 3 7 + * which assumes 5 8 + is held in a temporary cell until 3 7 + is combined and then multiplied with the temporary cell. The same situation occurs in Boolean logic which is really what complex tagging is.

Now I lied when I said this particular case can't be done without using the cache. If you carefully read about Tag menu > Tag by Matching in the Reference Guide, you'll see that this particular case can be handled using the template in Tag by Matching. But that's not always true for other cases.

Hope this helps.

Best,
Howard

[leonard]

I think I'm still a little confused, but that could just be me. I'll have to try it out when I've the time. my situation is this: I've got Brookfields and Williamses (my side0, and Goekes and Youngs (wife's side). All are in one file and apply to my immediate family. However, reporting to each of these four sides outside my nuclear group requires selecting out halves and quarters (in the form of various ancestral branches) of the whole file. I'm looking for a way to set tags and save that scheme for later recall and use in reporting to one side (or half of a side) of the family. In this case, four sets with possibility of combination would be pretty helpful and quick. I guess this belongs on the wishlist?

Leonard

[Howard Metcalfe]

Nov 7, 2010 17:43:49 GMT -5 leonard said:

I think I'm still a little confused, but that could just be me. I'll have to try it out when I've the time. my situation is this: I've got Brookfields and Williamses (my side0, and Goekes and Youngs (wife's side). All are in one file and apply to my immediate family. However, reporting to each of these four sides outside my nuclear group requires selecting out halves and quarters (in the form of various ancestral branches) of the whole file. I'm looking for a way to set tags and save that scheme for later recall and use in reporting to one side (or half of a side) of the family. In this case, four sets with possibility of combination would be pretty helpful and quick. I guess this belongs on the wishlist?

Leonard

Hi Leonard,

I think the best you can do when you want to report on say one grandparent and his ancestors and their families is to make that grandparent the current person and choose Tag menu > Tag Ancestral Branch of This Person. It's quick and easy to do whenever you want to report on that branch. So easy that there is no need to save the tags, just retag as above whenever you want to report.

Due to the restrictions I mentioned in a previous response, there won't be a way to cache multiple sets of tags. Some other Mac genealogical program might have this kind of capability but I don't know about that.

This works fine unless somebody back in the day married someone from one of the other three ancestral branches. But even then those other people would be part of both branches.

Best,
Howard

[leonard]

Thanks, Howard! It sounds like the ancestral branch tagging is the way to go.
Leonard