• Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!

  • If you're looking for the LostCousins site please click the logo in the top left corner - these forums are for existing LostCousins members only.
  • This is the LostCousins Forum. If you were looking for the LostCousins website simply click the logo at the top left.
  • It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here

FTAnalyzer questions.

Alexander Bisset said:
Code: 
EW_CENSUS_PATTERN = "Class: RG(\\d{2,3}); Piece: (\\d{1,5}); Folio: (\\d{1,4}); Page: (\\d{1,3})";
EW_CENSUS_1841_PATTERN = "Class: HO107; Piece: (\\d{1,5}); Folio: (\\d{1,4}); Page: (\\d{1,3})";
EW_CENSUS_1841_PATTERN2 = "Class: HO107; Piece:? (\\d{1,5}); Book: (\\d{1,3});.*?Folio: (\\d{1,4}); Page: (\\d{1,3});";
EW_CENSUS_1911_PATTERN3a = "Class: RG14; Piece: (\\d{1,6}); SN: (\\d{1,3})$";
Click to expand...

I am now feeling very stupid. I have managed to get all census references included in my Referrals Report for years 1841 and 1881 conforming to the above formats. However, none of the references appear for 1911, using pattern3a. All records in the report are now marked as census records, not RESI.
Has anyone else had success for 1911?
 
For most of mine I get this type of format.

Piece: 25623, Schedule: Missing

This is due to the Schedule not being available, for some reason they either didn't capture it or don't display it, but either way its not in the gedcom.
 
Bryman said:
I am now feeling very stupid. I have managed to get all census references included in my Referrals Report for years 1841 and 1881 conforming to the above formats. However, none of the references appear for 1911, using pattern3a. All records in the report are now marked as census records, not RESI.
Has anyone else had success for 1911?
Click to expand...
Can you give an example of a GEDCOM snippet that has an 1911 census that isn't being picked up by 3a?
 
Tim said:
For most of mine I get this type of format.

Piece: 25623, Schedule: Missing

This is due to the Schedule not being available, for some reason they either didn't capture it or don't display it, but either way its not in the gedcom.
Click to expand...

Are you sure?
 
peter said:
Are you sure?
Click to expand...

Yes. This is typical of most of the 1911 census records in my gedcom

3 PAGE Class: RG14; Piece: 25623

And only sometimes do I get this

3 PAGE Class: RG14; Piece: 16015; Schedule Number: 51

Clipboard.jpg
 
Alexander Bisset said:
Can you give an example of a GEDCOM snippet that has an 1911 census that isn't being picked up by 3a?
Click to expand...

Please see attached file for example. Let me know if you need further information.
I have tried to set up my data similarly for all censuses (even non LC years) apart from the actual format.
There may still be some sort of source mismatch but I cannot see it.
It must be something basic as none of the 1911 records get references reported while 1841 and 1881 do get included.
Thanks for any suggestions.
 

Attachments

I don't understand why the Schedule Number is missing in so many instances - all private households completed numbered schedules.
 
peter said:
I don't understand why the Schedule Number is missing in so many instances - all private households completed numbered schedules.
Click to expand...
Weren't there some Peter that you had advised that the user need to view the image to get the schedule number as it wasn't provided in the index page? Perhaps Tim has relied on the index and not manually added the schedule number to his family history program.
 
Tim hasn't added the schedule number manually, but for me the question is why are they displayed and captured correctly on some entries and not on others???

I'm going to check to see if I can add the schedule number manually now.
 
Ok, I've found how to do it Manually, both on the PC version and online.
 
V3.6.0.2 of FTAnalyzer now released it fixes Bryman's issue of references with ; at the end not being recognised. It also fixes an issue Tim had with colours on BMD report and an issue Andrew had with WA = Western Australia rather than Washington.
 
Alexander Bisset said:
V3.6.0.2 of FTAnalyzer now released it fixes Bryman's issue of references with ; at the end not being recognised.
Click to expand...

Thank you Alexander. I installed v3.6.0.2 and almost all of the 1911 references appeared as if by magic.
(My wife thinks I have started talking to myself but I have just been explaining my actions to the avatars of forum members hoping that one of my incantations would be successful. ;) )

The only remaining omission concerns my Blood Relative who was recorded (Piece 34993, SN 9999) as part of the Royal Horse Artillery in South Africa (and subject of an earlier post). Might the location be significant in some way? The Colour BMD Report shows 1911 as Dark Blue - On Census outside UK.
 
I tried to export my incomplete Referral Report to Excel, with the intention of adding the missing reference manually, but encountered an Unhandled Exception which caused FTA to shut down.

Value cannot be null.
Parameter name: source.
 
Checking the Gedcom Stats when FTA is started, I notice that for one of my files I get the message

"Found 99 census facts in GEDCOM File (97 good, 2 warnings (data tolerated), 99 usable facts loaded)"

FTA seems to have accepted my data but I am wondering if I need to change the way that I have recorded that data.
FTA is raising the warnings for two individuals (married and living together) for whom I have recorded residence at an address for more than just the day of the census. Should I change this to two periods - one for the day of the census and one for the remainder of the known period of residence?
The corresponding source record already identifies the single day of the census but it would seem that FTA is not taking note of that record in this instance.
 
It is the fact itself that has date info the source record is mostly treated as a special note, so having the date in the source wouldn't impact the issue.

The warnings are just that a warning that it might not be right to have treated your data in that fashion. Since you are happy it is right then there isn't really a need to change this.
 
Bryman said:
Checking the Gedcom Stats when FTA is started, I notice that for one of my files I get the message

"Found 99 census facts in GEDCOM File (97 good, 2 warnings (data tolerated), 99 usable facts loaded)"

FTA seems to have accepted my data but I am wondering if I need to change the way that I have recorded that data.
FTA is raising the warnings for two individuals (married and living together) for whom I have recorded residence at an address for more than just the day of the census.
Click to expand...

I now find that the Colour Census Report shows these instances as Orange (Lost Cousins flagged but no census entered). Does FTA only accept a census record if the start and end dates for residency are the same (and equal to the date of the census)?

Alexander Bisset said:
Since you are happy it is right then there isn't really a need to change this.
Click to expand...

If FTA cannot (or should not) be changed to show these as Green, should I split the period of residency into 'day of census' and 'other days', or would an additional 'day of census' record be acceptable (ie duplicated/overlapped census day)?
 
FTAnalyzer is happy if the date of the residency overlaps the census date, it will give a warning if the date overlaps more than one census as this may be an error.

The default in the GEDCOM standard is a RESIdency record spans a period of time someone was resident at an address, whereas a CENSus record records an snapshot instant in time event that flags the fact that the person was found on a particular census. Some people mix and match the two, some people (often Family Historian users) are quite strict about adhering to the GEDCOM standard. However it's your data it really it your call about how you want to record things. The standards are there for guidance not a rod to beat you with.

FTAnalyzer should show them as green as it does overlap the census day, when you mentioned warnings I'd assumed you meant the warnings on the data errors tab?
 
Thank you Alexander. I realise that there may be several ways to record certain facts and just want to sort out in my mind what might be the best practice. For instance, should periods of residency be broken down into serial strings of occupancy or should multiple occurrencies be recorded independently and allowed to overlap. Thinking about the possible ramifications of each approach before doing too much one way or the other might save me a lot of tedious extra work in the future just tidying things up. Airing this here on the forum might help others too.

Meanwhile, I have tried simply adding an extra period of residence (to make one for total known period of occupancy and another for day of census) and FTA then reported that year as Green rather than Orange (when only the total period was recorded). This may indicate something not quite right in FTA.

This may be handled differently by other FHS but if I record residency for a single day matched with a census source then FTA shows that as Green in the Colour Census Report. If this situation has residency indicated across years then FTA shows Orange on the Colour Census Report (assuming that LC is flagged in both cases). For example, residency 01/01/1911 - 02/04/1911 shows as Green but residency 31/12/1910 - 02/04/1911 shows as Orange!

Warnings mentioned originally were from the Gedcom Stats at initial load time, not on the Data Errors tab (that looks good).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top