Ultimate Family Tree 3 Summary
Export
UFT offers two GEDCOM options, one of which will be the choice for users. They are;
The GEDCOM 5.5 Family option.
The Family Tree Maker option.
The Family version is intended for all but Family Tree Maker users. When imported into FTW the exception file presents a long list of errors. Most of these “errors” are indeed errors. Four of the “errors” are significant however. They involve four of the sources and are not errors in the GEDCOM but in FTW's reading of the file. The error reported is an invalid CRI and the line is ignored. Result is four sources not transferred. The file created with the FTW option however creates a file with only one reported “error”. This is with regard to a note in the header and is not a legitimate error.
The principal difference between the two files is that the Family file provides the source type, the last changed date and uses the cross-reference (@xref@) to link the repository. In the Family Tree Maker file the repository is included using the REPO (Repository) tag at the 1st level with the data as a subordinate note.
In the Family Tree Maker mode UFT did NOT:
Code the QUAY(quality)
ROLE(role)
CAUS(cause)
NMR(number of marriages)
AGE(age)
RELI(religion)
NATI(nationality)
DSCR(description)
OBJE (object or image), tags
Export prefix, suffix, nicknames
No date ranges, only the structured dates.
Code citation page on EVEN (miscellaneous) event.
Code the Abbreviated place names
Code ASSO(associate) & RELA(relationship)
Code MARL(marriage license), MARB(marriage banns)
Export source links for MARR (marriage), ANUL(annulment), MARC(marriage contract), DIV(divorce), DIVF(filed for divorce),
Make adoption link to stepfather
Provide source or date for married name change.
Code detail for OCCU(occupation)
It DID.
Use ALIA(alias) tag for aka
Used EVEN(miscellaneous) for
CAST(caste)
conflicting BIRT (birth)
RESI(residence)
ORDN(ordination)
PROP(property)
BAPL(LDS baptism)
CONL(LDS confirmation)
ENDL(LDS endowment)
SLGC(LDS child sealing)
IDNO(ID number)
SSN(social security number)
EDUC(education)
GRAD(graduation),
GEDCHK indicates:
the TEMP(temple) tags at wrong levels.
Dates in Sources at wrong levels, need to be subordinate to 1 DATA(data),2 EVEN(misc.event).
UFT codes CHAN(change), DATE(date) and QUAY(quality) tags at wrong levels.
Address is also recorded at wrong level. Should be subordinate to attribute.
Address parts are sent using the tag ADDR(address) and CONT(continued) for additional lines. Makes PHON(phone) tag appear at wrong level.
UFT uses EVEN(misc. event) tag rather than legitimate GEDCOM tags and codes.
TEMP(temple) at 2 level illegally.
FTW exception list recognizes all these but also fails to transfer 4 sources reporting invalid CRI, and then has difficulties with some TYPE tags reporting they are at the wrong level. Coding is actually OK
UFT does not code all the source data that might have been entered originally. The data is extracted from the source component fields. If the repository is a source component, it will transfer. Any data recorded on the “more” page, repository, annotation, comments, call number, condition, data quality etc does not transfer. Media is not an option in UFT.
FTW records all data coded by the FTW version of the UFT GEDCOM properly with ABBR(abbreviation), REFN(reference number) and last changed date entered in comments. FTW fails to record from the UFT FAM version the repository, which is linked using the @xref@ convention, and the file type.
Conclusion.
Obviously the best way to transfer data from UFT to FTW is to use the option provided for that purpose. All data coded to the GEDCOM by UFT transfers. Unfortunately UFT fails to code much of the detail actually contained in its files.
UFT Family version comments:
In the FAM version of UFTs GEDCOM:
UFT did not export prefix, suffix, nick
UFT did not export:
ROLE(role)
RELI(religion)
NCHI(number of children)
NATI(nationality)
DSCR(description)
OBJE(object or image),
UFT transferred citation details even when source not transferred.
UFT did not code CAUS(cause).
UFT use EVEN(misc. event) and TYPE(event type) for CAST(caste). Not recognized by FTW.
UFT did not code OCCU(occupation) for Chorday
UFT abbreviated some PLAC(place) data
UFT did not code OCCU(occupation) details.
UFT did not code IDNO or SSN numbers (id number and social security number)
UFT coded ASSO(associate) as PROB(probate), no link made to other person.
FTW fails to record from the UFT FAM version the repository, which is linked using the @xref@ convention, and the file type.
Export rating 85.76 %
Import:
Control file:
Ultimate Family Tree has been discontinued by genealogy.com and will not be supported in the future. The program is included here in order that the user's may understand the GEDCOM difficulties it presents. The only option should a complete transfer of data be required is for the UFT user to import their data to The Master Genealogist using the GENBRIDGE feature.
The control file was imported in order to be able to indicate in the summary sheet how UFT would compare to other programs should someone decide to import a Gedcom file. The UFT exception list runs to 179 lines.
Problems found include:
Media (MEDI) tag was ignored.
Repository addresses did not transfer.
Quality (QUAY) tags were ignored.
Annulment (ANUL) tag was not recognized.
Number of marriages (NMR) tag not recognized.
Divorce filed (DIVF) tag recorded as divorce.
Address (ADDR) structure did not transfer.
Image (OBJE) data did not transfer.
Description (DSCR) did not transfer.
Identification number (IDNO) did not transfer.
Associate (ASSO) structure did not transfer.
-
Caste (CAST) tag recognized but descriptor was not transferred.
Ordination (ORDI) tag recognized but descriptor was not transferred.
Religion (RELI) source data was not transferred.
LDS ordinance status (STAT) information placed in exception list.
Marriage banns (MARB) tag recognized but no data transferred.
Marriage settlement (MARS) tag not recognized but marriage information entered twice.
Birth (BIRT) tag transferred date and place but no source information.
The greatest cause for concern was the transfer of sources. The seventeen sources in the control file were converted to 57 sources in UFT. Sources were duplicated but not all the information was contained in the duplicates. All sources would require careful editing.
Import rating 68.37 %