Color Coding Issues

I just watched the video about the advanced color coding for RM9 - excellent.
I do have a question though - and I hope the following is clear.
I set up color codes for our ‘Principle Ancestral Lines’ (Color Code set 1)- one for my spouse and one for myself. This gives a general which side of the fence do we find ourselves. We’ll call them “My Ancestral Lines” and “My Spouses Ancestral Lines” here.
Then I set up Color Code Set 2 - My Ancestral Lines with a color for my Paternal Line and another color for my Maternal Line.
So when I hover over the color code bar on Color Code Set 2 I get "My Ancestral Lines/ Paternal Line (or Maternal Line). Nice!
But when I hover over the unselected color code bar (unmarked now) of my spouses Ancestral Lines - still having chosen Color Code Set 2, the hover produces “My Ancestral Lines”.
The reverse happens when I choose Color Code Set 3 - “My Spouses Ancestral Lines” (divided similarly into paternal and maternal colors).
I hover over my ancestral lines (NOT chosen and blank of color) and “My Spouses Ancestral Lines” appears as I hover.
This occurs through all generations.
I hope this makes sense.
Anyway… am I setting the color codes wrong? Or is this a bug to be lived with.
TIA … Allen

When I hover over somebody who is not color coded in the current color set, nothing appears when I try to hover over the absent color bar. Is that what you mean? Essentially, I don’t seem to be able to reproduce your symptoms if I’m understanding your symptoms correctly.

I just cleared all colors and all selections to start over.

  1. I highlight myself.
  2. Name Color Code Set 1 “Siebold Ancestral Lines”.
  3. I choose Red as my color.
  4. Choose “Ancestors of Current Person” under “For these people”
  5. ‘Apply highlighted color…’
  6. I now have myself, my parents, and all my ancestors tagged with red.

However: I move my cursor down to my wife - who is NOT in my ancestral line, hover my cursor over the extreme left of her name (where a color code would be if she met the above conditions), and the words “Siebold Ancestral Lines” magically appears - the same for her (unmarked) ancestral lines.

They also appear when I hover my cursor similarly over our children.

I hope this is clearer.
Thanks for trying it.


I still can’t reproduce the problem. Here is a link to a short video of me trying to reproduce the problem. The video is 2:20 in length. See if what I am doing is any different than what you are doing.

I really appreciate the time you are spending on this!
I went back and followed your ‘path’… red was labeled ‘relative’, set to ancestors of highlighted person.
The word ‘relative’ did NOT appear on any but the red tagged people. This matches yours perfectly.

BUT, when I named my Color Code Set 1 to ‘Ancestors’ and applied that to ancestors of the highlighted person (as before with ‘relative’), that ‘Ancestors’ label appeared not only with the red tagged people (ancestor/ relative) but also on every other person, but just with the ‘ancestor’ label.

I don’t know how to do a video, but I have two edited screen shots that might help indicate what’s happening.

The first shows all tagged in red. Anna Roberta (Bertie) Beattie indicates Ancestor/ Relative - this is correct.

The second showing top people marked in red and bottom people unmarked. George Louis Johnson indicates Ancestor (the label of Color code set 1 which only has red (relative) marked) - he shouldn’t indicate anything in my opinion.

I labeled Color Code Set 2 - Ancestral Line 2 and marked part of my wife’s line in green (labeled ‘more relatives’) - same procedure as above.
The ancestors so marked in green indicate Ancestral Line 2/more relatives as they should.
But everyone now shows the label for Color Code Set 2 (Ancestral Line 2) no matter what line they are in.

The ‘overlap’ would be with the labels of the chosen Color Code Set, not the label for an actual color.


Aha! I see what’s going on.

I had left my color code set #1 unnamed. So I named it A Horse of a Different Color and I still labeled the color red as Ancestors. Having done that, hovering over a red person says the following

A Horse of a Different Color

and hovering over a person without color simply says

A Horse of a Different Color

Prior to that when color code set was unnamed, the red person simply said


and a person without color said nothing.

So in summary, the following is the case during a hover. An unnamed color code set says nothing about the name of the color code set for persons with color or persons without color. A person with color lists the name of the color if the color has a name in the current color code set and says nothing about the color if the color doesn’t have a name in the current color code set. And a person without color doesn’t say anything about the color. I don’t think I explained it very well, but it’s all very logical. And I certainly learned something new today. It’s important to name your colors and your color code sets. And it’s important not to mix up your color names with your color code set names.

By the way, I have wished that there were some always visible indication on the screen about which color code set is in use. There still isn’t. But if you name your color code sets and if you do a hover, then you can see what the current color code set is. I don’t think that’s adequate, but it’s way better than nothing.

1 Like

By golly, you’ve seen it!
I was beginning to wonder if it was just me - thank you.

This property of labelling Color Code Sets can actually confuse the purpose of setting color code groups.
Maybe I’ll just label the colors alone.

Next… how much trouble will I get into learning about Groups?

Thanks so much. I appreciate your time.
Maybe someone at HQ might see this issue and fix it?


I’m not sure there is an issue to fix. Even if there a person who is not color coded, there is a color set in effect. When a color set has been given a name, it makes sense to me for a hover over a color block for a person without a color to show the name of the color set.

But there is another alternative. What does make sense to me is to show the name of the color set somewhere on the screen at all times without need for the hover. Maybe if it was done that way, it would no longer be necessary or even desirable to show the name of the color set for each hover. Then the hover would show only the name of the color if a color had been given a name and would show nothing for a hover over a person without a color. And for that matter, it makes sense to me to show the the name of the color like “red” or “blue” on a hover, even if the color hasn’t been given a name like Ancestors or Cousins. Some of the colors are so similar that I can’t tell them apart otherwise.


I’m considering it a new feature - and I like it. Now I can easily tell if I forgot to color code someone or if I’m in the wrong group. And within a group, I have set up non-direct relatives and the roll-over says Group Name/Sub group so I know which family sub-line they’re part of. With a large database, this is wonderful!