Return Pedigree View to Standard Form

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: Please either return the pedigree chart to the industry standard of the man always listed on the top line and the wife on the bottom. Or make it optional which way the pedigree chart is viewed.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Industry Standard?

Uh, not exactly.

Various charts have been produced over the years and while they have largely following a practice of listing the man and woman in that order, the increased incidence of **** marriages now dictates that the **** must be accommodated in both positions.

To change the position of the persons on the chart, the instructions are in this article: "How do I switch parent or spouse positions to change the display of family lines in Family Tree? - https://www.familysearch.org/help/sal...

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: Thank you

I guess I don't understand why all of the rest of us needed to go in and make changes to what has been the standard for many many years.

I understand the need people have to be able to accomodate **** in both positions. Why not make that available to those who need that instead of making everyone have to go in and make changes to settings.

At least there is a way to put it back

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: I just went to the page you linked to. However it indicated that By default, in the pedigree landscape view, the name of a male spouse or parent appears above the name of the female spouse or parent. In portrait view, the male name appears to the left of the female name. Structuring the couple relationship this way affects how the rest of the family line displays. In landscape view, paternal lines move diagonally upward; maternal lines, by contrast, move diagonally downward.In male-female relationships, you cannot change this arrangement.

I did not make this change yet it is happening. I checked with a female friend and hers lists her on the top of their pedigree chart also.

I followed the instructions. On my relationship page, under tools there is not an option to switch as the instructions indicate. The only thing under Tools is See All Changes and Delete Relationship. All Changes are dated Mar 2019 and the rest are dated Aug 2014.

What am I suppose to do to make the change?

LegacyUser

Chas Howell said: I think what Marilyn is experiencing is related to the problem that some PIDs have for some reason flipped male/female positions. My own wife currently has this problem on her living PID with her spouse (me). The "change position" function is not available under "Tools" as it is on **** couples.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: I believe that part of the tweak works this way. If you are displaying a PID and select the "View Tree" link, it takes you to the tree with that person on top, regardless of their sex.

In the Knowledge Article that Tom gave above, in the first sentence of the second paragraph in the Information section it states that

In male-female relationships, you cannot change this arrangement. You can, however, change the arrangement for **** relationships.

So you cannot "flip" the position using the method in that knowledge article. If you want to put any individual on top in the pedigree, you have to go to their PID and then select the "View Tree".

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: It seems to be only on the pedigree that any female that was originally on the bottom are now in the top position.

I don't think PID has anything to do with it. I checked my 2nd great grandmother and it did the same thing to her.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: But if you go to your 2nd Great Grandfather and select "View Tree", it should flip them.

Does it?

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: Before I click on her View Tree she is in the bottom position where she should be. I don't want her moved to the top position. It is not only her but all of her daughters that are moved to the top position.

LegacyUser

Chas Howell said: Okay, got my wife's view corrected like you said, go to the male person/detail page then click "View Tree" Thanks

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: It did not correct the problem that is system wide. It did not fix my pedigree tree.

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: I am going to put in a case report. I hope that someone can answer this.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: If ALL of the females in her pedigree ALSO go to the top positions, I think something is wrong. FS was working on this area of the tool 4 days ago:
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: Not sure which way you are says flip. Mine still stay with the female on top

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Like this:

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: Yes I see what you did. But the next time you open Ruth's tree is she on the top or bottom

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: It all depends on how you bring it up. If you first bring up Ruth's record or id in a popup and select View Tree, it will come up like the first image above. If you select Tree from her details page, it will go to the last tree that was displayed. In this case it would be the third image above.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: It's kind of an unintuitive way to navigate a tree, but at least now it is always consistent. Selecting "Tree" in the top general menu (where ever you are), will take you to the last Tree that you had displayed on your screen. If you are looking at a specific person or an ID popup of them anywhere on the site, if you click on the "View Tree" link (i.e., the one normally accompanied by a little pedigree tree icon), it will always take you to that point in the tree with that person at the root, and on the top of the root couple relationship.

Always now unless they change it again.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Marilyn

FYI

This problem/issue was raised x4 Days ago ...

Consistent family tree position
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Where an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" ('Joe') indicated that ...
"... you have found a bug that the team is working on ..."
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

I hope this helps.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: This sounds like a bug to me. FamilySearch, hopefully, will get this to work consistently and not screw things up.

FamilySearch: in my opinion, clicking on the tree symbol for a female, should open with her and her husband at the center of the landscape view, with her husband on top and her on the bottom -- in other words, the classic/traditional view.

The only time where that would not appear is when there is a **** relationship. That should always be the determining factor when the traditional view is not used.

My apologies for not understanding the situation and that this is being caused by a bug. In the following, Miss Huber died as an infant:

Wrong:

Also Wrong:

In both instances, as a female, Miss Huber should appear below where a husband (if she lived to marry) would appear.

Likewise, this is also wrong, when the tree was opened from Sarah Belle Anthony's record.

Note that this kind of thing is confusing at best. As I said, the only time a female should appear in the top position is for a **** couple relationship.

LegacyUser

joe martel said: This is likely the same bug that has been reported to the teams. It can happen when the user is female and in the root person.

LegacyUser

Marilyn Thompson said: Yes I can see that is what is happening. I how it will be fixed. It is very frustrating to try and guide someone through to help them understand the system if it is not consistent.

It would have been very helpful if the first fellow that replied to my post would have just said that there was a problem in the program. He knew about it. Instead he went off on the issue of **** couples. Also he mocked me in referring to Industry Standard Pedigree Charts. I was not favorably impress with his sarcasm.

Thank you. I did not put in a case report on this issue since it was already reported.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I admit that I misinterpreted the problem in my initial response, but the need to support **** relationships is likely the cause of the problem. And for that I apologized because I didn’t fully understand the problem until I actually played around with the way things set up for an unmarried person in the tree. Then I decided to see how things set with a free set up from a married woman’s perspective and that’s where I saw the real problem.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: The male - female relationship is one that we've been told is a known problem and hopefully, before long, it will be resolved.

The problem is demonstrated in the https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... discussion about six days ago (toward the bottom of the discussion.

Some of the problem has been resolved, but not entirely. Miss Huber (unmarried) is now consistently shown in the correct place in her box. But not her mother, who is the focus person in the tree.


She remains out of place if I change the focus person to her father. However, if I change the focus person to Miss Huber, she remains in the correct position.

This problem has not been resolved fully. Only if there is no spouse listed does the female remain in the correct position in a tree view.

I tried signing out and then signing back in again, and the problem remained with Sarah Belle Anthony remaining in the upper position.

But, when I made Miss Huber the focus person, the parents' positions reverted to the way it should be.

Here is the sequence that puts things out of place for a female.

Open the landscape pedigree view.

1, Click on any femaie on the display and select "tree". This places the focus of the refreshed chart on the female and places her in the upper position (incorrect when no **** relationship is involved).

2. Now click on the father (Henry Miller Anthony) and make him the focus. Sarah Belle Anthony remains in the upper position, although she is now shown as a child.

Changing the pedigree view (Portrait, Descendancy, and Fan -- and back to landscape) does not correct the problem.

Changing the focus to a sibling and back to the father does not correct the problem.

3. Now select one of Sarah Belle Anthony's children -- it doesn't matter which one and make them the focus of the tree. That action corrects the problem.

This still is a problem and so I repeated the above information in a couple of other discussions.

LegacyUser

joe martel said: This should be fixed now.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Verified. This appears to work correctly now.

My thanks to the team(s) responsible for getting this fixed.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Shor'nuff is. And the **** couples behave identical to the traditional couples with the one exception that they can be reversed in the Tools area of the edit couple relationship or edit child relationship screens