The Leeds Method Report is only looking at shared matches between individuals. The individuals do not need to be linked to anyone in the tree. Print the report as a reference to help determine where unlinked individuals may fit in your tree and research them further. The RM10 Help page for the Leeds Method Report has a link to the Dana Leeds website so you can learn how it works.
From Leeds Method report information form groups or color code as needed. RM does not search for individuals with a DNA Match so manual reference from the Leeds Method report is where you start.
Hi Marina and Renee, sorry to be so late weighing in here but I took some time off from my research. Marina - I agree it would be best to have a recommended process, but I suggest you do: 1, 3, 2 from your list.
Add DNA matches (would be best if we could import from DNAGEDCOM, GEDMatch, etc but that could also lead to rampant data challenges.
Match the initial list of DNA matches to your tree. This way you have both the provider and RM10 names already linked
Add from shared matches, which RM10 should be able to “auto-match” into your tree. If you add a 1st cousin, then RM10 should find common matches and suggest them as a link.
Add twigs and branches leading to common ancestors.
Now is when we need the power of the analytics engine. Confirmed matches should align to “side view”, e.g. maternal/paternal.
RM10 should also be able to calculate the MRCA (shortest path to common ancestral pair, pretty standard networking calculation).
We need a color palette linked to DNA MRCA calculations (but there are definitely challenges related to the “source” person OR do you use the same color coding to represent ancestral sides and generations regardless of source - do I want to see it differently if looking at ME vs. maternal aunt vs. nephew?)
Same color palette needs to be linked to a fan chart (ancestral view) which then identifies confirmed and missing DNA relationships. I’d actually suggest a “standardized” color palette going back ~8 generations (64 ancestral pairs, 128 total 5G-Grandparents). DNA is good to about 7 generations.
Hope this helps. I’m going to Christmas myself the upgrade and start playing around. Hoping the import feature is high on the list!
One major problem with imports, especially those from places such as Ancestry, GEDMatch and so forth, is that all of those places would need to produce some type of API for RM to use to gather the data. I expect that would take the sites a few years before that happens and since all of them use differing formats for the DNA matches, there would need to be some type of data cleanup to normalize it enough to be useful.
Keep in mind that you are dealing with two programmers that would need to carve time out of the normal development plans to figure out how to write a lot of code do deal with this list of wants. Maybe by RM15 this all might came into existence but I really wouldn’t be holding my breathe to see this.
GEDMatch already has a standard CSV export format for matches. DNAGEDCOM is a site scrubbing tool which grabs data from A, myH, 23, and others. It can generate standard CSV files for imports.
The import process would be keyed off of “who is the primary” which then links against your profile and the file. All secondary names would be imported as “new” entries for your tree. Then you would have to go 1 by 1 through them to link the the appropriate person in your tree (similar to an existing merge duplicates funtion), or leave it blank so you know there’s more research to be performed.
The advantage is automated import of company, target label, CM length, % DNA match, # segments, etc, and possibly date matched, as well as the “in common with” entries which enable the LEEDs method and other broader research methods.
Then, as long as a common label/company match would be updated for all tests, it’s a significant improvement in DNA evaluation.
I don’t know enough about the market segment RM or other tools target to know if enriching DNA analysis is a higher priority than other items in the backlog.
Great! Still you would need to do all the exporting and importing into RM because without said API, RM will have no ability to import otherwise. Then those two programmers can spend all their time trying to analyze the data coming in and matching it up with the data in your file. Not even Family Tree Maker has tried that yet, and they have considerable more developer power than Rootsmagic…so again, don’t hold your breathe…you may turn a bit blue.
I am also not overly certain anyone should be happy with a bunch of “new” entries being added to their file.
Rootsmagic has just begun their foray into DNA analysis so I stand by my suggestion that you might see much better tools by about RM15. Personally, I think it would be a lot smarter for someone to develop some type of analysis tool then you can import all of the DNA stuff into and import your GEDCOM and let it do the analysis outside of the actual Rootsmagic (or any other program) data file.
The templates are not standard. I have used DNAGedcom and imported to a sql database Genealogical DNA Analysis Tool (GDAT). The creator of this tool works with Rob Warthen and each company’s template is different including what information they provide and where it is located.
I second that - I have been adding chr data in the DNA notes field.
Another wish:
** ability to enter matching DNA with 3 people (triangulation) with chr data.