Re: Descendant report NGSQ numbering system issue in FTM2012

Thank you for the reply. However, the problem still exists. To clarify, here is an example of what I am getting:

Note that Edith Smith and Henry Jones are first cousins from common ancestor used to generate this descendant report.

73. Edith Smith ….. married Henry Jones……. [First entry for one of the first cousins]

Henry Jones and Edith Smith had the following child:

+218 i. Melvin Jones…..

Later in the report…..

79. Elmer Fud ….. married …….

Elmer Fud and …. had the following child:

+238 i. Son Fud…..

80. Henry Jones ….. married Edith Smith……. [Second entry for the other of the first cousins]

Henry Jones and Edith Smith had the following child:

+218 i. Melvin Jones…..

81. Daniel Lee …. married ……

Daniel Lee and ….. had the following child:

+240 i. Tom Lee…..

Nobody in the report is numbered 239. I suspect the number 239 was internally assigned to the “second” instance of Melvin Jones, but then the software recognized that Melvin was really number 218. So number 239 goes unused for the entire report. Similarly, other numbers go unused for children of number 218 due to the same software behavior. FTM circa 2005 properly handled this in the descendant report and did not skip 239 or numbers associated with the children.