@ Kimberly Green-- I guess I’m not understanding what all you would want to add under Residence-US etc that you can’t add now ( of course I do understand that you are just using Residence as an example)…
I understand what thejerrybryan want to add
BUT Jerry you can do that now-- you just have to type it all out in the description, place details and place field…
Would it be easier to have your template in there----yes
Not sure which ones you are referring to, but every Canadian province I have lived in for the last 63 years has counties or a reasonable equivalent. 
So, if I understand the app right, a narrative reports picks up the sentence from the corresponding type sentence.
Example, in the case of my 5x great granfather James Freeland, I have a 1790 Residence fact for him.
That 1790 sentence come from the associated Residence fact template Sentence.
Looking at the Fact Type definition, you can see that (a) the sentence is formed using the Sentence Template Language of RM & (b) there are no additional fields defined nor can there be. The dialog box doesn’t offer a way to ‘edit fields’. There is only the option to add a few already-defined ones (date field, place field, etc).
So, what I’m pointing out is … right now, a user cannot add custom fields, nor modify the sentence template, of a Fact Type. If the Fact Type could be modifiable to include additional user-specified fields, then a user could define however many geographic subdivisions they needed.
For example, if Jerry wanted to, he could create a Residence_x Fact Type that substituted [Place] and instead defined the more granular fields of his example (City, County, Parish, State, Country)
Instead of the Sentence template being the current:
[person] lived < [Desc]><[PlaceDetails]>< [Place]>< [Date]>.
He might define his custom Fact Type sentence as:
[person] lived in <[City]><, County><, [Parish]><, [State]><, [Country]> on < [Date]>. < [Desc]>.
In turn, when a report picked up that sentence, it would use the more granular sentence as well.
And, since the Sentence Template Language can be used to control it and only display values that have been entered. If a place doesn’t use it, it just doesn’t appear.
AND, you can see from the above that the commas can be inside the conditional variable. If the variable is empty, both the value and comma don’t appear. If the variable has a value, it gets a properly-placed comma ahead of it.
Oh, I do do it now. I’m not sure what the Description field has to do with places, but I put everything that is place related in the Place field. I don’t use Place Details because they are too likely to be lost on transfer to software outside of RM.
For example, I might places such as the following.
In my view, this is exactly how I want these places to look in reports. But I have to violate standards to make the reports acceptable - omitting the country, including the word County, omitting the comma comma when the town is known and the county is not known, and including what naturally is Place Details information in the main Place field. Therefore, a lot of users and a lot of Web sites such as FamilySearch don’t like my place names.
Instead, I would like to use “standard” place names (whatever that is) and still format them in a way that makes sense and can be accessible to non-genealogists in printed reports. For example, if I had a place name like Knox, Tennessee in a printed report, nobody would know what I meant. What is Knox? We don’t have Knox schools and Knox Sheriffs Department and Knox taxes. What we have is Knox County schools Knox County Sheriffs Department and Knox County taxes. I think genealogy software and data models needs to respect the real world.
From The Canadian Encyclopedia:
Unlike many other provinces, Saskatchewan does not have counties . Instead, local governance is carried out by eight different types of municipalities: northern towns, northern villages, northern hamlets, villages, resort villages, towns, cities and rural municipalities.
You can find this article Here
I was wondering if someone would chime in. I figured if there were provinces which did not have counties they would in the West. I am mostly familiar with the Eastern provinces. While counties still exist in most of the Eastern provinces they tend to be less important as administrative regions than they were in the past. The recent trend to amalgamations and municipal reorganisation has shifted their importance in more modern times. But they are still important historically. My province of origin (Prince Edward Island) has three counties but also still uses an archaic numbered Lot system in land identification which dates back to the beginning of British rule. At that time the entire province was divided into about 67 Lots which were awarded to favourites of the crown. I grew up in Queens County, but also in Lot 24. That system was used regularly in land transactions and occasionally in Census organisation there. I have never really come to grips with how to best use the Lot identification numbers in place names where they appear in old records. They do not completely align with community or postal divisions and are very confusing for anyone who is not familiar with them.
I put the historically-accurate location in the place field, then I edit the place record and put the modern place name in the Standardized Name field. And, of course, I geocode every location.
