Things about the New Merge system that Annoy me:

LegacyUser

Roy F Hunt said: 1) Information about the person or family: This information does not seem to line up properly. It is much better when you get to step 2 - Why not make this a 2 step process rather than a 3 step process and just start with step 2.
2) Switching positions: This is a 2-step process. When I click on “Switch” the records should switch places. - Make this a 1 step process.
3) Sources:
a) When I click on the source all that comes up is the citation which is totally useless.
b) After clicking on the URL I get the information that I need to make an informed descion. However, there dosen’t seem to be away to get off this screen without going all the way back to the beginning and starting the whole process over again. - When I click on the source, I want to see the “details of that source” and put a nice little “X” in the upper right corner that will take me back to the merge in process.
4) Warning Statements: When I have two records with the same PID or I have two records that have already been merged I get 3 warning statements. The third one is the one that applies to my problem. - How about having just the warning statements that applies to the situation at hand. That would make it less confusing.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: Yes, I would like sources to show their actual information as shown in sources tabs as normal. I also would like the switch positions just to show the animation of the two actually switching the positions. I tried to read what it says in the modal that comes up but I got tired and just clicked next.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I decided to use the descendancy chart to locate a record that had a possible duplicate.

On Roy's point 1:

On the first screen, it is important that we be able to align the people in the to-be-merged record on the left with the existing people on the right.

In my case, there isn't much to align, but if we were to align the equivalent persons, then it would be clear if this was a possible duplicate or not.

In fact, I would go so far as to require the names be aligned (like they are required in the (old) source linker).

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I need to note that I did not follow through on Roy's other points and so have no opinion on their veracity, but if what he says is true, then the merge process definitely needs some additional work.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: On Roy's point 3 -- The link in the source is a disaster because it overwrites the existing screen. It must open the source in its own tab or window, and not overwrite the merge screen!

His point that there does not seem to be a way of closing the screen is valid, but that's because it has overwritten the merge screen.

That must be fixed!

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I haven't had occasion to swap places between the two records, so cannot comment on that aspect of the system. Roy is correct if it takes more than one click to complete the swap.

LegacyUser

joe martel said: Just addressing the #3 is a problem, totally losing the work you've done, when going through the URL link. However, I do see the Citation, Note and URL fields when I open the Source. I think the other problems are already known.

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: Regarding #3:
Basic web browser function is being used. Click on a link and it opens in the same window. Right click or command click on a link and it opens in a new window or tab depending on your settings.

If opened in the same window, using the back arrow does return you to the same part of the merge which you left.

I do agree that it would be better to force the link to open in a new tab in this situation even though it goes against what is apparently a common convention:

It is not hard to find arguments against opening content links in new windows by default. Usability and accessibility experts tend to agree it offers little or no benefit for users, and in many cases hurts the experience and perception of the site.

It is harder to find arguments in favor of opening content links in a new window.
https://adrianroselli.com/2020/02/lin...

Regarding #2:
The action of switching really seems to be so self evident that the warning box that come up when clicking switch really does seem superfluous. Not only that, but it doesn't even work right.

Clicking Switch brings up this box:



Look at the text that states which person will be saved and which will be deleted. The name and ID are the same.

On the positive side, there is something new here that will be very popular based on past comments on this board. If you move your cursor to the top of the box, the header highlights, the cursor changes to to a move icon, and you can drag the box where ever you want it:





Assuming this new style will be used for all such pop up boxes throughout Family Tree, this will make such boxes much easier to work with.

LegacyUser

Juli said: I believe part of the point is that you shouldn't need to open the source separately to see the note field and/or the indexed data. It should be shown right there on the merge screen if you expand the source.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: Yes like in when you are editing details, you can view the sources.