I imported the GEDCOM file created by FTM 2011 into RootsMagic 4 yesterday, and looked at the same source citations in RootsMagic (the "Footnote"). The results are (with some entries showing the Source Comments also because they are sometimes informative):
Vital records index (imported from FTM2011)
The source screen for this citation is shown below:
Record Commissioners of Boston, Record Commissioners of Boston, A Report of the Record Commissionersof the City of Boston Containing Dorchester Births, Marriages andDeaths to the End of 1825 (Name: Boston, Mass., Rockwell & Churchill, City Printers, 1890;)
Elizabeth French Bartlett, Bartlett, Elizabeth French, " Genealogical Research in England" (Name: Name: New England historical and Genealogical Register, Volume76,Number 2 (April 1922), pages 115-129;;)
Bartlett, Elizabeth French. " Genealogical Research in England:Weeden". New England Historical and Genealogical Register,. Volume76, Number 2 (April 1922): Pages 115-129.
Smith/Carringer Family Letter Collection, 1888-1902. Privately heldby Randall J. Seaver, Chula Vista CA 91911.
Rebecca (Spangler) Carringer, Carringer Family Births, Marriages andDeaths (loose pages), 1828-1946. unknown title. unknown location:unknown publisher, unknown date; before 1901. Privately held byRandall J. Seaver, Chula Vista, California 91911. 1988-2011.
Loose Birth, Death and Marriage pages in hand of Rebecca (Spangler)Carringer, Della (Smith) Carringer and Lyle L. Carringer
For reference purposes, I entered information for this last citation into the RootsMagic 4 source template for "Bible Records" to see how it looked:
Listed below are items that I noticed resulting from the export of the FTM 2011 database into a GEDCOM file and then importing that file into the RootsMagic 4 program:
* All of the Master Sources in RootsMagic are Free-form" format. [no surprise to me...]
* There are often two words stuck together that should have a space between them. This happens in the Notes also for an FTYM 2011 to RM4 GEDCOM import. [I have heard that this is because of FTM's use of the concatenate tag (CONC) rather than the Continuation (CONT) tag in the GEDCOM file.]
* Any italicization of titles or other fields was lost. [no surprise here, GEDCOM is a pure text file without formatting]
* The Publication fields are pretty messed up, with the word "Name" added, and sometimes the words "Name: Name:" added at the beginning of the field. There are also semi-colons added to the end of most publication fields. [this surprised me, both program have the same fields]
* Authors names for published books, periodicals and newspaper articles are sometimes duplicated. FTM 2011 has separate fields for lead author surname, lead author first name, and other authors names. [not surprised due to different fields in different programs]
* The order of source elements is different from the FTM 2011 template order, and many elements in the FTM 2011 templates are provided in Source Comments in RootsMagic 4. [not surprised, RootsMagic tries to put data into the free-form fields.]
* The repository data is provided in the Repository field in RootsMagic 4 as opposed to in the actual Source Citation in FTM 2011 (if selected by the user). [logical to me why this happened]
I'm sure that there are more differences for each citation type.
The purpose of this post was to show the differences, and not assign blame or make suggestions for improvement for either program. An examination of the GEDCOM file text would indicate which GEDCOM tags are used to export the file to determine if the exporting program or the importing program create the problems. A fair test would take template sources from RootsMagic and import them into Family Tree Maker 2011 using the same process.
However, it does demonstrate the problem that GEDCOM export/import of sources badly often mangles the sources carefully created using source templates in the original program. The ideal situation is that every bit of information in the imported program using GEDCOM is identical in content and format to the information in the exporting program.
I'm still wondering if it is worth the time to use the source templates in any program, or just use free-form citations (created perhaps using Evidence! Explained models).
We will look at Legacy Family Tree 7 tomorrow.