Family Tree citation date changes apparently causing false positives re updated entries
I have been trying to work out which of the FT entries linked to by my RootsMagic database have been updated since early May 2023.
When RM checks this ('What's New') it flags a load of what definitely appear to be false positives.
I looked at the Person JSON for one example, and found this in the FT citation in sourceDescriptions:
"value" : "\"Family Tree,\" database, <i>FamilySearch</i> (http://familysearch.org : modified 06 September 2023, 14:17), entry for Nathaniel Wood (PID https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/4:1:L4GJ-7RM ); contributed by various users."
If you click into the link you can see that this person's FT entry has not been updated since 16 Jan 2021, and the Sources have not been updated in any way since 20 May 2022 (this is backed up by all the timestamps on the relevant JSONs, other than the one for the FT citation as just mentioned).
The updated FT citation value doesn't appear anywhere on the FS UI that I can identify, so I can't check that (I realise it has a role in information exchange).
So, why did the Family Tree citation date change yesterday?
One other possibly related question. RM has a field called 'fsVersion'. Does anyone know what this is for? The highest values I can find for it do appear (I think) to reflect the most recent updates (if only to FT citations, as above), but I cannot work out what the value represents or where to find it on the FS UI or in the browser-accessible APIs. I have a feeling that this is what RM is using to identify supposed 'updates'.
Thanks!
Answers
-
You might get better information by asking in a RootsMagic discussion group. If you are active on Facebook/meta, there is a good group there: https://www.facebook.com/groups/371699529684266
0 -
Thanks, will try both of those, but surely this FamilySearch community is the place to ask why its FT citation date had got changed for no obvious reason? Others may have experienced this & it is not in any way a RM specific matter.
0 -
I suspect it may be more of an issue in how RootsMagic interacts with FamilySearch. I wasn't saying you shouldn't ask here, and someone may be able to give you an answer here.
0 -
That's fine thanks, appreciated.
1
