The changes in the way Ancestry deal with addresses looks as if it is
similar to FTAnalyzer which will map the addresses in a GEDCOM file and the
coding hierarchy used in ISO County codes. Although the Chapman code is
within the set of standards there are a few Chapman codes which have been
re-used by ISO namely KEN becomes Kenya instead of Kent and one we have seen
before SOM becomes Somalia instead of Somerset.
The ISO hierachy for place names is
Countries, Regions, SubRegions, Addresses, Places
So it what come out of Ancestry depends on how they have created the
address mapping table if they thought of it at all!
in the example shown in Adrian's email my guess is that County was missing
in the recorded address and Ancestry assumes the country is USA as my guess
is that no-one in the USA add USA to the addresses recorded in their FH
records (any more than I have put UK, England in mine!) and used the reverse
order as well.
Broomfield, Bromfield & Brumfield One Name Study
From: sog-uk-bounces(a)rootsweb.com [mailto:email@example.com] On
Behalf Of Adrian Bruce via
Sent: 14 August 2015 10:06
Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] The latest version of Ancestry
The old one *is* still available - as John Hanson says, Peter Calver's
newsletter shows you how to revert and from memory it's simple enough -
click the down arrow next to your identity on the front Ancestry screen,
and one of the options in the drop-down menu will take you back. (I
can't confirm that because I haven't gone forward - but the option to go
forward is there, so I presume that's where the option to go back will be).
Ironically, of course, the "old" Ancestry is what everyone complained so
bitterly about when it was introduced.
So far as I understand, the majority of the substantial changes are
confined to the Trees, but there they include some serious issues such
as locations being misinterpreted and an incredibly convoluted method of
downloading images. As I say, I have no direct experience yet, so I have
no idea whether the Trees that moved Birmingham from the West Midlands
to Alabama (e.g.) had full settlement / county / country names or not.
The overall colour scheme (which I presume *does* affect the record
searching side as well) is not meeting with universal approval either.
If you do revert, you are apparently offered the opportunity to say why.
I shall work out a test program for myself and do some trials later.
On 14/08/2015 08:00, sog-uk-request(a)rootsweb.com wrote:
... If anyone else feels as disappointed as I do, they might
like to know that there is a petition asking to make the old version
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
SOG-UK-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message