Changes to the Name

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Changes to the Name

Don Allingham
The whole call name discussion occurring on gramps-users is starting to
frustrate me. From my perspective, this means either we come up with a
good generic solution, or we get no solution at all.

So far, it seems the comments all tend to boil down to "My problem needs
to be addressed perfectly, and everyone else's problem can be handled by
a hack". Sorry, but this does not work for me. If we go down that path,
we end up with 3000 individual hacks, and a 15 day training course will
be needed to learn how to use the program.

So, I will state the issues that we know, and I will propose a solution.
This solution may not be perfect for every situation, but hopefully
should address the issues without causing an undo burden on anyone.

The issues:

1) In some areas of the world, (including Germany and other areas),
   there is the concept of a Rufname (translated to English as a call
   name), which is what the person is commonly called. This Rufname
   should be underlined in reports. The Rufname is a legal entity, and
   is one of the names in a person's given name. So for "Hans Peter",
   the rufname may be either "Hans" or "Peter", and that name should be
   underlined in reports.

2) In some areas, the concept of a Rufname exists, but with a slightly
   different definition. In this case, a subset of a name may be
   considered a Rufname. The example give was "Richardus" with the
   Rufname of "Richard". It is not clear if this should be underlined.

3) Other areas have the equivalent of a "call name", which is what a
   person is commonly called. This name does not necessarily have a
   legal status, but is not really viewed as a nickname, and may not be
   one of the given names or a subset of the given name. An example of
   this would be the given name of "William" with the call name of
   "Bill". In this case, the person may frequently appear in documents
   with the name of "Bill", not "William". While some may view this a
   nickname, it is treated differently. In  newspapers and other
   documents, a nickname is usually in quotes.

   Example: Peter Edward Rose has a call name of Pete, but the
      nickname of "Charlie Hustle". You will almost *never* find any
      reference in general documents referring to Peter Edward Rose.
      Virtually every reference will call him Pete Rose. In fact,
      Google is smart enough to also return results for Pete Rose if you
      request information on Peter Rose.

      (Yes, I grew up as a fan of the Big Red Machine in the 70's)

Proposed solution(s):

I'm starting to view this as two separate issues. The first is an
underlining issue, and the other is a "Commonly called" name issue. And
I believe that as long as we try to treat these as the same issue, we
will fail to arrive at a solution.

So, to address the underlining solution:

1) Mark up characters will be added to given name entry field that will
   allow you to delimit the section of a name that should be underlined.
   The '<' and '>' characters will be used to indicate the start and
   stop of underlining. So, if "Hans Peter" should have "Peter"
   underlined, then it should be entered as "Hans <Peter>". The display
   routines will be enhanced to handled this, remvoing the mark up
   characters and replacing with underlining. Possibly in the future, we
   can replace this with a more visual indicator, such as true
   underlining in the entry field, based on the limitations of GTK.

To address the Commonly Called issue:

1) The nickname field will disappear. The current method of handling
   nicknames is flawed anyway, since a nickname appears to be related
   to a name, but internally is not. Also, there is a limit to a single
   nickname. The nickname field will be replaced with an Attribute
   called "NickName". You may add as many nicknames to a person as you
   like.

2) Each Name will allow for a "Commonly Called" field. This will allow
   you to add a name that a person is commonly called, that may not be
   part of the formal given name. There will be one Commonly Called
   field for each Name. Reports may choose to use any combination of
   the formal name (such as "Donald Norman Allingham") or the common
   name ("Don Allingham").

Comments are welcome.

--
Don Allingham <[hidden email]>

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes to the Name

Joachim Breitner
Hi,

Am Mittwoch, den 16.11.2005, 14:09 -0700 schrieb Don Allingham:

> So, to address the underlining solution:
>
> 1) Mark up characters will be added to given name entry field that will
>    allow you to delimit the section of a name that should be underlined.
>    The '<' and '>' characters will be used to indicate the start and
>    stop of underlining. So, if "Hans Peter" should have "Peter"
>    underlined, then it should be entered as "Hans <Peter>". The display
>    routines will be enhanced to handled this, remvoing the mark up
>    characters and replacing with underlining. Possibly in the future, we
>    can replace this with a more visual indicator, such as true
>    underlining in the entry field, based on the limitations of GTK.

Sounds great to me, so at least as I am concerned, case #1 is solved :-)


Greetings,
Joachim
--
Joachim Breitner
  e-Mail: [hidden email]
  Homepage: http://www.joachim-breitner.de
  ICQ#: 74513189


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.  Get Certified Today
Register for a JBoss Training Course.  Free Certification Exam
for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit:
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7628&alloc_id=16845&op=click
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Gramps-devel] Re: Changes to the Name

Eero Tamminen
In reply to this post by Don Allingham
Hi,

On Wednesday 16 November 2005 23:09, Don Allingham wrote:

> The whole call name discussion occurring on gramps-users is starting to
> frustrate me. From my perspective, this means either we come up with a
> good generic solution, or we get no solution at all.
>
> So far, it seems the comments all tend to boil down to "My problem needs
> to be addressed perfectly, and everyone else's problem can be handled by
> a hack". Sorry, but this does not work for me. If we go down that path,
> we end up with 3000 individual hacks, and a 15 day training course will
> be needed to learn how to use the program.
>
> So, I will state the issues that we know, and I will propose a solution.
> This solution may not be perfect for every situation, but hopefully
> should address the issues without causing an undo burden on anyone.
>
> The issues:
>
> 1) In some areas of the world, (including Germany and other areas),
>    there is the concept of a Rufname (translated to English as a call
>    name), which is what the person is commonly called. This Rufname
>    should be underlined in reports. The Rufname is a legal entity, and
>    is one of the names in a person's given name. So for "Hans Peter",
>    the rufname may be either "Hans" or "Peter", and that name should be
>    underlined in reports.
>
> 2) In some areas, the concept of a Rufname exists, but with a slightly
>    different definition. In this case, a subset of a name may be
>    considered a Rufname. The example give was "Richardus" with the
>    Rufname of "Richard". It is not clear if this should be underlined.
>
> 3) Other areas have the equivalent of a "call name", which is what a
>    person is commonly called. This name does not necessarily have a
>    legal status, but is not really viewed as a nickname, and may not be
>    one of the given names or a subset of the given name. An example of
>    this would be the given name of "William" with the call name of
>    "Bill". In this case, the person may frequently appear in documents
>    with the name of "Bill", not "William". While some may view this a
>    nickname, it is treated differently. In  newspapers and other
>    documents, a nickname is usually in quotes.
>
>    Example: Peter Edward Rose has a call name of Pete, but the
>       nickname of "Charlie Hustle". You will almost *never* find any
>       reference in general documents referring to Peter Edward Rose.
>       Virtually every reference will call him Pete Rose. In fact,
>       Google is smart enough to also return results for Pete Rose if you
>       request information on Peter Rose.
>
>       (Yes, I grew up as a fan of the Big Red Machine in the 70's)
>
> Proposed solution(s):
>
> I'm starting to view this as two separate issues. The first is an
> underlining issue, and the other is a "Commonly called" name issue. And
> I believe that as long as we try to treat these as the same issue, we
> will fail to arrive at a solution.
>
> So, to address the underlining solution:
>
> 1) Mark up characters will be added to given name entry field that will
>    allow you to delimit the section of a name that should be underlined.
>    The '<' and '>' characters will be used to indicate the start and
>    stop of underlining. So, if "Hans Peter" should have "Peter"
>    underlined, then it should be entered as "Hans <Peter>". The display
>    routines will be enhanced to handled this, remvoing the mark up
>    characters and replacing with underlining. Possibly in the future, we
>    can replace this with a more visual indicator, such as true
>    underlining in the entry field, based on the limitations of GTK.

Although I'm one of the people wanting this underlined callname thing,
I'm not sure whether it's worth implementing.  This markup thing sounds
a bit complicated and I don't think it's very obvious from the UI.

Also, there comes a question of what kind of markup should be allowed
(bold, italic, underline), how they are ignored in sorting etc, how they
are output in reports & does user have any control over how it's
interpreted, and how it's saved to database.


> To address the Commonly Called issue:
>
> 1) The nickname field will disappear. The current method of handling
>    nicknames is flawed anyway, since a nickname appears to be related
>    to a name, but internally is not. Also, there is a limit to a single
>    nickname. The nickname field will be replaced with an Attribute
>    called "NickName". You may add as many nicknames to a person as you
>    like.
>
> 2) Each Name will allow for a "Commonly Called" field. This will allow
>    you to add a name that a person is commonly called, that may not be
>    part of the formal given name. There will be one Commonly Called
>    field for each Name. Reports may choose to use any combination of
>    the formal name (such as "Donald Norman Allingham") or the common
>    name ("Don Allingham").
>
> Comments are welcome.

This sounds good!

(At least in my ignorance of Gramps innards, this sounds more
straightforward to to implement too. :-))


        - Eero


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.  Get Certified Today
Register for a JBoss Training Course.  Free Certification Exam
for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit:
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7628&alloc_id=16845&op=click
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes to the Name

Joachim Breitner
Hi,

Am Mittwoch, den 16.11.2005, 23:56 +0200 schrieb Eero Tamminen:
> Although I'm one of the people wanting this underlined callname thing,
> I'm not sure whether it's worth implementing.  This markup thing sounds
> a bit complicated and I don't think it's very obvious from the UI.

It definitely is worth implementing, I need it :)
Non-UI-obviousness maybe is a good thing, as it does not interfere with
Auntie Kate, but still gives the required features for those who need it

> Also, there comes a question of what kind of markup should be allowed
> (bold, italic, underline), how they are ignored in sorting etc, how they
> are output in reports & does user have any control over how it's
> interpreted, and how it's saved to database.

Sorting has to be adressed, of course. But isn't the sorting string an
internal, constructed one anyways? Should be no problem skipping the
markup chars.

I'd suggest this feature is not advertised as "markup" but as "marking",
i.e., not a layout feature but a data feature. Then we can use this
information for e.g. this GEDCOM 5.5EL format that Udo Vogel found, if
we ever want to export to that.

Joachim
--
Joachim Breitner
  e-Mail: [hidden email]
  Homepage: http://www.joachim-breitner.de
  ICQ#: 74513189


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.  Get Certified Today
Register for a JBoss Training Course.  Free Certification Exam
for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit:
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7628&alloc_id=16845&op=click
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Changes to the Name

Eero Tamminen
Hi,

On Thursday 17 November 2005 00:01, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > Although I'm one of the people wanting this underlined callname thing,
> > I'm not sure whether it's worth implementing.  This markup thing sounds
> > a bit complicated and I don't think it's very obvious from the UI.
>
> It definitely is worth implementing, I need it :)

Sorry, I meant "not sure whether it's worth implementing right now".
I mean, this feature doesn't seem so straightforward and I think it
might need a bit more thought first. (see below)


> Non-UI-obviousness maybe is a good thing, as it does not interfere with
> Auntie Kate, but still gives the required features for those who need it

Ok.

> > Also, there comes a question of what kind of markup should be allowed
> > (bold, italic, underline), how they are ignored in sorting etc, how
> > they are output in reports & does user have any control over how it's
> > interpreted, and how it's saved to database.
>
> Sorting has to be adressed, of course. But isn't the sorting string an
> internal, constructed one anyways? Should be no problem skipping the
> markup chars.

It seems a bit funny to have this kind of a feature with a lot of
implications (to UI, database data, lists, reports etc) for just a single
field in Gramps.   Why not have it then in all the Gramps text fields?  :-)

Maybe there could then be also other markup "tags" too and a possibility for
advanced users (somehow) to tweak how they are represented in the reports...


> I'd suggest this feature is not advertised as "markup" but as "marking",
> i.e., not a layout feature but a data feature. Then we can use this
> information for e.g. this GEDCOM 5.5EL format that Udo Vogel found, if
> we ever want to export to that.


        - Eero


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.  Get Certified Today
Register for a JBoss Training Course.  Free Certification Exam
for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit:
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7628&alloc_id=16845&op=click
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users