Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Tree Tool ???

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The no-brainer improvements still needed

    are (1) reducing the font size for the names in the detailed view, so they are not so much larger than the rest of the text and are not truncated.
    (2) putting the dates before the locations, which is standard practice and does not result in the dates being pushed out of view.
    (3) adding scroll bars!!!!!!!!
    (4) reducing the default size, so that it is not necessary to repeatedly hit the minimize button before being able to use the page at all.
    (5) making the ancestry view the default, because it's what most users want to see.

    Ideally, we would have a pedigree view instead, but I guess that's too much to hope for.

    Comment


    • I have decided

      I have decided if there is no way to block matches who want share with me I want have a tree here. For now I will see what happens but I planning to build a new Gedcom tree which might only have surnames. I know thats no good but sharing with matches who want share with me is getting old and having a tree like that will give nothing away and make it possible for me to see how the tree turns out. I see improvement with the tree I hope the option of blocking will happen if not I'm gone.

      Comment


      • build surname lists from family trees

        The surname list no longer gets built/updated when a gedcom is loaded. The list is a huge benefit in being able to quickly have clues as to common ancestors. With the new
        software, we are losing that capability. What would be even better is to have "user entered data" through the new edit function also update the surname list. Alternatively you could have a "cron task" which would periodically read all trees and update the lists.

        Comment


        • display surname for private people

          I notice that myheritage will display surnames for the people marked private. I know privacy policy is very difficult for making all people happy. But it would be very
          useful if the surname could be displayed. I personally don't think that gives away much useful info. And it would really help the case where people that were many generations away from the test individual are being displayed as private. Worst case, you could have an option that could allowed surnames to be displayed. If go down this path, I would be happier if the default was to display them.

          Comment


          • Link Icon Question

            Why is it that when one links a matching name, (from the little link icon on the lower right), the linked person in my tree then becomes private?

            The explanation says that an email will be sent to the kit person who's tree has that name. But, what happens next? I don't understand how this is supposed to work.

            It would make a lot more sense if I were able to investigate the link name in the other person's tree to see if I really think they are the same person as the one in my tree.

            BTW, after clicking on the link match name, sometimes the little link symbol shows on the match name in my tree, but sometimes it does not. Bug?

            Comment


            • There are still way too many private entries being listed, obviously unintentionally by the uploader. Also another bug if you are logged in through GAP and looking at a Known Relationship Request, if you click on the matches tree their tree doesn't open instead the tree for the kit member you are logged into is opened.

              Comment


              • build surname lists from family trees - impacts surname search

                Originally posted by keithburgess View Post
                The surname list no longer gets built/updated when a gedcom is loaded. The list is a huge benefit in being able to quickly have clues as to common ancestors. With the new
                software, we are losing that capability. What would be even better is to have "user entered data" through the new edit function also update the surname list. Alternatively you could have a "cron task" which would periodically read all trees and update the lists.
                I agree that uploading a gedcom (or manually adding a person) should update the surname list. I'd just like to point out that the "Ancestral Surnames" filter only searches the surname list, so currently a surname search will not find matches who have added trees under the new system - unless the owner manually populated the surnames list.

                BTW, I reported this issue shortly after the new tree feature was introduced so they should be aware of it.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by travers View Post
                  There are still way too many private entries being listed, obviously unintentionally by the uploader. Also another bug if you are logged in through GAP and looking at a Known Relationship Request, if you click on the matches tree their tree doesn't open instead the tree for the kit member you are logged into is opened.
                  The privatizing of names certainly was unintentional for my brother's gedcom. When I first went on his tree after the trees became a "feature" for FTDNA, I found a random selection of ancestors were private. I checked my tree and there those ancestors were showing. Since I had downloaded the same gedcom for my brother that I had for me, except for our personal names, I found this totally confusing.

                  The linking of people from one tree to another through names also was confusing and upsetting along with the general format of the trees. When the forum has people coming on and saying how great the new system is, I'll consider reloading a couple of Gedcoms. Until then I'll let everyone else deal with the SNAFU.

                  Comment


                  • Please return the scroll bars

                    Among many other changes others have mentioned, I would also like to ask for scroll bars to be restored to the tree display. I really dislike having to "grab" to move around a page.

                    Also part of this: I happen to have a Mac "Magic Mouse," which has a touch surface. I have not even gotten into trying all the various "gestures" one can use with it, but primarily use it for scrolling on a web page (as you'd do with a scroll wheel). The only times this causes a problem is when I'm on something like a Google Maps page. Then, when I instinctively move my finger to scroll, I get the rude awakening that I'm zooming in or out.

                    That's what happens with the new trees here at FTDNA. If I momentarily forget and try to scroll, I'm zooming in and out wildly. Why not have scroll bars, as we used to? What's the compelling advantage to grabbing and moving, if any? Seems like a lot of unnecessary wrist/arm motion to me, which could be an issue for those with carpal tunnel or other issues.

                    Have the people that designed the tree, and other aspects of the FTDNA site, studied website usability? Do they consider their audience, or just try to fit a "cool" function into an "improvement?"

                    Why not do some customer surveys in advance, to see what we'd like so you have a better idea of how to direct your resources, instead of getting so many complaints when you change things?

                    Okay, end of my rant for today.

                    Comment


                    • Houston you have a problem?

                      Finally got something to work, sort of.

                      Clicking on the link icon on the lower right hand side of the myfamilytree display shows a list of names each of which, as I understand, may correspond to one of the names in my gedcom. When I then click on one of those names, and then go to the matching person in my tree display, it shows the little link icon next to that person.

                      I then click on the icon, or the person, forgot which, and get a display with some additional choices. At this point I can choose to proceed with the link so that that person is incorporated into my tree. Then I get to display the pedigree of that person. At which point I discovered that this was not the same person, and I should have not placed her in my tree, at least not at that point.

                      The only alternative at this point is then to remove that person and all their ancestors. The problem is that my original linked-to person (in my original gedcom) now is removed along with all of their family.

                      I should be able to peruse the pedigree of the candidate link name from the match list before the link is consummated so that I can determine if I want to proceed with the link.

                      My description of the process I went through may not be exactly right, but the fact that I had to complete the link before being able to inspect the pedigree, seems to be a bug.

                      Please straighten me out or fix this.

                      Thanks,

                      Dave

                      Comment


                      • Almost useful...

                        If someone has uploaded a tree and you match them, it should give hints based on the surnames in the tree... not just the surname of the person who matches. They may not have given their surname or they may be related through maternal DNA and not share a surname.

                        Also, why only autosomal DNA hints? Why isn't the Family Tree tool and hint-system used for Y-DNA and mtDNA? Seriously... the amount of time I have to spend trying to research each individual for mtDNA is a bit ridiculous. If someone matches both FMS and FF DNA then there's a strong potential genetic link that isn't super obvious with the current system.

                        There needs to be a feature for designating someone as "living" or not and it needs to only apply to the most recent 4 or 5 generations. Way too many people simply don't have data for earlier ancestors and I find pieces/parts of trees being blocked etc. Contacting individuals for access to trees is all well and good until the person managing the account loses interest or passes away and that potentially valuable genealogical information is lost forever.

                        I will say that when I first signed up for FTDNA it wasn't clear that personal information, trees etc. wouldn't be viewable by the general public REGARDLESS of my privacy settings. It's still fairly misleading in the settings when refering to "public" vs. "private." If I understand the system correctly, nobody can see ANYTHING regarding anyone on FTDNA unless they have purchased a test themselves and are, in fact, a member. Even then, information is only visible to genetic matches.

                        Therefore, the privacy settings are misunderstood by most users who default to "private" out of a desire to protect information that's already protected. The only people we end up making our information "private" to are the very ones we're hoping to connect with. Very. Frustrating!! Just saying.

                        Comment


                        • @Bohunk

                          The rules are well known, this is just a very new tool... Too new...

                          For example it could be, that anybody born before 1900 is not private and they ancestors are not private too regardless of information provided, unless they are explicitly marked private by the owner.

                          Then in 2015, anybody born before 1901 is not private, etc. However, the designation private/public does not appear to be dynamic, so FTDNA would need to run some programs each year to make the adjustments...

                          Comment


                          • Still frustrated

                            I am still extremely frustrated with FTDNA's slow response to our concerns about the new family tree. However, today I finally made contact with a person who seems to be trying to understand our concerns. Through a series of emails I was told the reason I couldn't see my family tree was because I had only loaded three generations and needed to reload it. No, there are still 10 generations and always have been. Then I was told my GEDCOM was corrupted during the upgrade to the new trees. No, it's all there, shows up clearly as dots in the upper right, just can't view it onscreen except for a very, very small portion. When trying to pull up my own tree, which I should know how to navigate, I first had to click for Ancestry View (should be the default) then I had to click 10 times and then drag around to find the people in the tree but at that resolution I can't even read the names to I had to enlarge it two clicks. I can now drag (no longer scroll) across, but only one generation's line at a time. And if you are looking at the tree of a match and want to look back at their list of surnames, then you have to start the process all over when you go back to their tree because it has again defaulted to family view. The previous system allowed you to leave both their tree and your list of matches open. And the usual response to our concerns is "there is no problem." So please keep trying to explain the problems and provide screen shots etc. At least one person is listening.

                            Comment


                            • I've heard that people who upload gedcoms after the new tree was introduced cannot upload more than 4 generations of ancestors. Is that true?

                              Someone on an unrelated mailing list told me that. She had tried. And I do notice that my new matches do have trees that go back only a few generations. Coincidence or design?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ERHill66 View Post
                                I have decided if there is no way to block matches who want share with me I want have a tree here. For now I will see what happens but I planning to build a new Gedcom tree which might only have surnames. I know thats no good but sharing with matches who want share with me is getting old and having a tree like that will give nothing away and make it possible for me to see how the tree turns out. I see improvement with the tree I hope the option of blocking will happen if not I'm gone.
                                First - learn the difference between "won't" and "want" if you want to be more easily understood (and do not want to be thought uneducated, etc).

                                Re: Blocking - 1)If you are simply going to block me from seeing your tree - fine, no problem. So far, have not found looking at a single Tree here the least bit useful. 2) Most places that allow blocking have it as a two-way process - which I would expect to be true at FTDNA also, if it ever does ever implement blocking (and so you will never know if/when they add a gorgeous tree) 3) If you mean blocking on individual level so they cannot see you at all - seems stupid. You prevent them from recognizing names in your surname list or your own name as a relative and contacting you, from seeing how you match themselves and other relatives whose kits they manage and contacting you, etc etc.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X