Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

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

Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

Nico Rikken
First: thank you all for this great software, documentation and community!


Backstory
I have compiled my family tree from three relatives of different sides of the family using both a GEDCOM and manual import.

Two of them will continue on with their trees, and so I'd like to keep a reference to their trees around. Each tree has their own ID system.
Initially I considered keeping the trees of all 2 sides of the trees of me and my wife seperate (so 4 trees), but having them all in one view is insightful, as most come from the same region. For example going by online published trees there should be a connection in my parents trees in the past, although I need to verify this.
I started out offsetting the Gramps IDs in the thousands, but as one of the treeds grew larger than 1000, this required a complete renumbering. Not great.

Question
The new solution I came up with, is by introducing a custom attribute for each of the original trees. Then I can keep the numbers in there. But I haven't found a way to add a custom attribute. Is this possible? Where can I do that, and is this a supported use-case?


If I'm going about this the wrong way, please tell me so. I'm still quite a beginner, so tips are welcome.

Kind regards,
Nico Rikken, NL



--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

Connie Mack
Hi Nico. The first thought that comes to my mind is adding a tag that IDs the person that contributed the tree or the surname of the most recent person in the tree if you want to identify 4 separate trees. You can have multiple tags too. I did this with my son's father's tree that is mingled in with mine. You could do that quickly by exporting their data as a csv file and adding the tag to all people in the tree. I recently discovered OpenRefine as a great tool for manipulating and cleaning up data too, thanks to gramps user StoltHD. 

Connie

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 3:30 AM Nico Rikken <[hidden email]> wrote:
First: thank you all for this great software, documentation and community!


Backstory
I have compiled my family tree from three relatives of different sides of the family using both a GEDCOM and manual import.

Two of them will continue on with their trees, and so I'd like to keep a reference to their trees around. Each tree has their own ID system.
Initially I considered keeping the trees of all 2 sides of the trees of me and my wife seperate (so 4 trees), but having them all in one view is insightful, as most come from the same region. For example going by online published trees there should be a connection in my parents trees in the past, although I need to verify this.
I started out offsetting the Gramps IDs in the thousands, but as one of the treeds grew larger than 1000, this required a complete renumbering. Not great.

Question
The new solution I came up with, is by introducing a custom attribute for each of the original trees. Then I can keep the numbers in there. But I haven't found a way to add a custom attribute. Is this possible? Where can I do that, and is this a supported use-case?


If I'm going about this the wrong way, please tell me so. I'm still quite a beginner, so tips are welcome.

Kind regards,
Nico Rikken, NL

--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

John W. Kitz-3

Nico,

 

Although I think a lot comes down to personal preference I'm inclined to advise against separate trees. For one because this is most likely going to mean that you'll have to enter a lot of your sources, citations, etc. more than once. In fact when I started out using Gramps at one point I thought it was a good idea to use more than one tree in order to be able to distinguish between different portions of the data I had collected up to that time. After some time I concluded in my situation it was not a good idea to work with more than one tree, so I reworked my data into one tree and started to use tags for various purposes. Such as in my case to distinguish between dominant spelling variations or the origin of certain sets of data, i.e. at one point I used a specific tag to tag a relatively larger subset of individuals in my data whose data I collected from a secondary rather than from a primary source (church books, civil status registers, etc.), until such time that I was able to confirm the findings obtained from the secondary source with data from a primary source.

 

Another benefit, at least in my opinion, from using tags is that they allow you to color code you data as well as provide for yet another way to make selections of your data using the various search and filter options that Gramps has. As for the length of the ID fields, as per the advice of someone on this list I at some point set all my ID formats to %05d, not as much because I was concerned that the default setting would at some point not be able to accommodate the increasing number of individuals in my data, but because of the number of sources and particularly citations of which one may have a half a dozen or more per individual. To be specific; my data at this time contains about 3,500 individuals, yet about 15,000 citations, i.e. on average slightly over 4 citations per individual.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.

 

From: Connie Mack [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Sunday, 20 October, 2019 13:33
To: Gramps User MailList
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

 

Hi Nico. The first thought that comes to my mind is adding a tag that IDs the person that contributed the tree or the surname of the most recent person in the tree if you want to identify 4 separate trees. You can have multiple tags too. I did this with my son's father's tree that is mingled in with mine. You could do that quickly by exporting their data as a csv file and adding the tag to all people in the tree. I recently discovered OpenRefine as a great tool for manipulating and cleaning up data too, thanks to gramps user StoltHD. 

 

Connie

 

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 3:30 AM Nico Rikken <[hidden email]> wrote:

First: thank you all for this great software, documentation and community!

 

 

Backstory

I have compiled my family tree from three relatives of different sides of the family using both a GEDCOM and manual import.

 

Two of them will continue on with their trees, and so I'd like to keep a reference to their trees around. Each tree has their own ID system.

Initially I considered keeping the trees of all 2 sides of the trees of me and my wife seperate (so 4 trees), but having them all in one view is insightful, as most come from the same region. For example going by online published trees there should be a connection in my parents trees in the past, although I need to verify this.

I started out offsetting the Gramps IDs in the thousands, but as one of the treeds grew larger than 1000, this required a complete renumbering. Not great.

 

Question

The new solution I came up with, is by introducing a custom attribute for each of the original trees. Then I can keep the numbers in there. But I haven't found a way to add a custom attribute. Is this possible? Where can I do that, and is this a supported use-case?

 

 

If I'm going about this the wrong way, please tell me so. I'm still quite a beginner, so tips are welcome.

 

Kind regards,

Nico Rikken, NL

 

--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org



--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

Peter Merchant
On 20/10/2019 13:30, John W. Kitz wrote:

Nico,

 

Although I think a lot comes down to personal preference I'm inclined to advise against separate trees. For one because this is most likely going to mean that you'll have to enter a lot of your sources, citations, etc. more than once. In fact when I started out using Gramps at one point I thought it was a good idea to use more than one tree in order to be able to distinguish between different portions of the data I had collected up to that time. After some time I concluded in my situation it was not a good idea to work with more than one tree, so I reworked my data into one tree

I did this too. Haven't really got into tags like you have yet, but at least I only have to enter each new grandchild once.

Took awhile to merge about 6 different family trees. I wrote about it a few months ago.

Peter M.




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

prculley
In reply to this post by Nico Rikken
To answer your initial question; a custom attribute can be used.  Most Gramps 'type' selectors allow you to create new types by simply typing in the desire text.  On my systems you get a 'ding' sound when doing this, which may make you think you are doing something wrong, but you can type anything in there and it will be used as typed.

Note; you can also type the first few letters of the desired value, even when it is already one of the choices.  This may make it faster to enter than using the mouse and menu.

For your desired use, I do think that using 'tags' might be better.

Paul C.

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 2:31 AM Nico Rikken <[hidden email]> wrote:
First: thank you all for this great software, documentation and community!


Backstory
I have compiled my family tree from three relatives of different sides of the family using both a GEDCOM and manual import.

Two of them will continue on with their trees, and so I'd like to keep a reference to their trees around. Each tree has their own ID system.
Initially I considered keeping the trees of all 2 sides of the trees of me and my wife seperate (so 4 trees), but having them all in one view is insightful, as most come from the same region. For example going by online published trees there should be a connection in my parents trees in the past, although I need to verify this.
I started out offsetting the Gramps IDs in the thousands, but as one of the treeds grew larger than 1000, this required a complete renumbering. Not great.

Question
The new solution I came up with, is by introducing a custom attribute for each of the original trees. Then I can keep the numbers in there. But I haven't found a way to add a custom attribute. Is this possible? Where can I do that, and is this a supported use-case?


If I'm going about this the wrong way, please tell me so. I'm still quite a beginner, so tips are welcome.

Kind regards,
Nico Rikken, NL

--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

Dave Scheipers
If you use the Attribute method, there is a Set Attribute tool under
Family Tree Processing.  You need to create a filter to batch add the
attribute to the person's record.

Something to think about. Are these attribute/tags something you want
in reports? Tags are for the user's use for manipulating the database
and do not show in reports. Attributes do (or often will) show in
reports.

Dave

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 9:55 AM Paul Culley <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> To answer your initial question; a custom attribute can be used.  Most Gramps 'type' selectors allow you to create new types by simply typing in the desire text.  On my systems you get a 'ding' sound when doing this, which may make you think you are doing something wrong, but you can type anything in there and it will be used as typed.
>
> Note; you can also type the first few letters of the desired value, even when it is already one of the choices.  This may make it faster to enter than using the mouse and menu.
>
> For your desired use, I do think that using 'tags' might be better.
>
> Paul C.
>
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 2:31 AM Nico Rikken <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> First: thank you all for this great software, documentation and community!
>>
>>
>> Backstory
>> I have compiled my family tree from three relatives of different sides of the family using both a GEDCOM and manual import.
>>
>> Two of them will continue on with their trees, and so I'd like to keep a reference to their trees around. Each tree has their own ID system.
>> Initially I considered keeping the trees of all 2 sides of the trees of me and my wife seperate (so 4 trees), but having them all in one view is insightful, as most come from the same region. For example going by online published trees there should be a connection in my parents trees in the past, although I need to verify this.
>> I started out offsetting the Gramps IDs in the thousands, but as one of the treeds grew larger than 1000, this required a complete renumbering. Not great.
>>
>> Question
>> The new solution I came up with, is by introducing a custom attribute for each of the original trees. Then I can keep the numbers in there. But I haven't found a way to add a custom attribute. Is this possible? Where can I do that, and is this a supported use-case?
>>
>>
>> If I'm going about this the wrong way, please tell me so. I'm still quite a beginner, so tips are welcome.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Nico Rikken, NL
>>
>> --
>> Gramps-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>> https://gramps-project.org
>
> --
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

Nick Hall
On 20/10/2019 15:25, Dave Scheipers wrote:
> Attributes do (or often will) show in
> reports.

You could make them private.


Nick.




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

Dave Scheipers
True

But to make an attribute private would require either individually
editing each attribute or doing a search and replace within the xml
backup and then importing to a new database. I did this to set all
Social Security Numbers private. Periodically I do this again to make
sure I have not forgotten to set new SSN entries to private.

And if all these attributes are marked private, then in effect they
become just like a tag.

My main point was that if this information in a report was desirable,
then using attributes would be better than tags.

Dave

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 10:32 AM Nick Hall <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 20/10/2019 15:25, Dave Scheipers wrote:
> > Attributes do (or often will) show in
> > reports.
>
> You could make them private.
>
>
> Nick.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

enno
In reply to this post by Nico Rikken

Hallo Nico,

 

If you haven’t made any changes to the combined tree, you can also start over, and let Gramps add a tag on import. You can set that tag in the Preferences dialog, and if you change that before importing each of the GEDCOM files, all persons, and maybe other items, will have the proper tag. This should be much easier than keeping different ID ranges, which may be messed up when you import data into another program.

 

Preferences also have an option to add a source during import, but I think that a tag is much easier, especially because it’s really easy to filter the person view by tag, and I haven’t seen that source in my test anyway. Adding the tag works fine in Gramps 5.1.1.

 

Groeten uit Nieuwegein,

 

Enno

 

 

Verzonden vanuit Mail voor Windows 10

 

Van: [hidden email]
Verzonden: zondag 20 oktober 2019 09:31
Aan: [hidden email]
Onderwerp: [Gramps-users] Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

 

First: thank you all for this great software, documentation and community!

 

 

Backstory

I have compiled my family tree from three relatives of different sides of the family using both a GEDCOM and manual import.

 

Two of them will continue on with their trees, and so I'd like to keep a reference to their trees around. Each tree has their own ID system.

Initially I considered keeping the trees of all 2 sides of the trees of me and my wife seperate (so 4 trees), but having them all in one view is insightful, as most come from the same region. For example going by online published trees there should be a connection in my parents trees in the past, although I need to verify this.

I started out offsetting the Gramps IDs in the thousands, but as one of the treeds grew larger than 1000, this required a complete renumbering. Not great.

 

Question

The new solution I came up with, is by introducing a custom attribute for each of the original trees. Then I can keep the numbers in there. But I haven't found a way to add a custom attribute. Is this possible? Where can I do that, and is this a supported use-case?

 

 

If I'm going about this the wrong way, please tell me so. I'm still quite a beginner, so tips are welcome.

 

Kind regards,

Nico Rikken, NL

 

 



--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original trees

Peter Merchant
Wish that I had known that six months ago!

On 20/10/2019 18:10, Enno Borgsteede wrote:

Hallo Nico,

 

If you haven’t made any changes to the combined tree, you can also start over, and let Gramps add a tag on import. You can set that tag in the Preferences dialog, and if you change that before importing each of the GEDCOM files, all persons, and maybe other items, will have the proper tag. This should be much easier than keeping different ID ranges, which may be messed up when you import data into another program.

 

Preferences also have an option to add a source during import, but I think that a tag is much easier, especially because it’s really easy to filter the person view by tag, and I haven’t seen that source in my test anyway. Adding the tag works fine in Gramps 5.1.1.

 

Groeten uit Nieuwegein,

 

Enno

 

 




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original tre

Nico Rikken
In reply to this post by Nico Rikken
Thank you all for the offered solutions.

I already did the imports, so automatic tagging seems out of the question.

I started referencing the trees as sources, and so a citation approach with ID as page number seems a good fit. My goal is to reference to a specific item in the other tree for collaboration, rather than a general tag, so storing IDs helps.

Tags for the level of verification and main surnames sounds like a nice idea for filtering. I could get to the same level of filtering of I can filter persons on source and confidence level. Perhaps I will use tags to keep track of families I have looked for children, to avoid a duplicate effort.

I tried custom attributes after the instruction. Seems alright, I have to experiment a bit more with it.

There was a mention of color coding based on tags. That seems like a nice feature, but I couldn't figure out how to do so.

Thanks for the advice, I have enough information to go experiment.

Kind regards,
Nico Rikken (NL)

"[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> schreef op 20 oktober 2019 10:33:13 CEST:
The way I've opted to do this is to create a source for the Family Guide that uses each ID system. Then put a citation with the ID in as the page number for each person.

I add a note to the source. It icludes the publication info and explains the ID numbering system.

My hope is that there eventually will be direct support for IDs. 

For online systems, it might include a generalized URL/URI feature that allows parameter passing. (Looking up a FindAGrave, WikiTree, or FamilySearch profile has evolved into several incarnations as they upgraded their databases. But they have all used the profile ID as a parameter.) But this might also support parameter passing for a Repository (that might be a Document Management System, traditional library, or the Wayback Machine internet archive) holding a copy of the source.

-Brian

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 2:31, Nico Rikken
First: thank you all for this great software, documentation and community!


Backstory
I have compiled my family tree from three relatives of different sides of the family using both a GEDCOM and manual import.

Two of them will continue on with their trees, and so I'd like to keep a reference to their trees around. Each tree has their own ID system.
Initially I considered keeping the trees of all 2 sides of the trees of me and my wife seperate (so 4 trees), but having them all in one view is insightful, as most come from the same region. For example going by online published trees there should be a connection in my parents trees in the past, although I need to verify this.
I started out offsetting the Gramps IDs in the thousands, but as one of the treeds grew larger than 1000, this required a complete renumbering. Not great.

Question
The new solution I came up with, is by introducing a custom attribute for each of the original trees. Then I can keep the numbers in there. But I haven't found a way to add a custom attribute. Is this possible? Where can I do that, and is this a supported use-case?


If I'm going about this the wrong way, please tell me so. I'm still quite a beginner, so tips are welcome.

Kind regards,
Nico Rikken, NL

--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org

--
Verstuurd vanaf mijn Android apparaat met K-9 Mail. Excuseer mijn beknoptheid.

--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Custom ID's to represent ID's or original

GRAMPS - User mailing list
Tagged items are listed in the highest priority Tag color.

Use the Organize Tags to change the color of a Tag and shuffle their priorities.


-Brian

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 15:54, Nico Rikken
Thank you all for the offered solutions.

I already did the imports, so automatic tagging seems out of the question.

I started referencing the trees as sources, and so a citation approach with ID as page number seems a good fit. My goal is to reference to a specific item in the other tree for collaboration, rather than a general tag, so storing IDs helps.

Tags for the level of verification and main surnames sounds like a nice idea for filtering. I could get to the same level of filtering of I can filter persons on source and confidence level. Perhaps I will use tags to keep track of families I have looked for children, to avoid a duplicate effort.

I tried custom attributes after the instruction. Seems alright, I have to experiment a bit more with it.

There was a mention of color coding based on tags. That seems like a nice feature, but I couldn't figure out how to do so.

Thanks for the advice, I have enough information to go experiment.

Kind regards,
Nico Rikken (NL)

"[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> schreef op 20 oktober 2019 10:33:13 CEST:
The way I've opted to do this is to create a source for the Family Guide that uses each ID system. Then put a citation with the ID in as the page number for each person.

I add a note to the source. It icludes the publication info and explains the ID numbering system.

My hope is that there eventually will be direct support for IDs. 

For online systems, it might include a generalized URL/URI feature that allows parameter passing. (Looking up a FindAGrave, WikiTree, or FamilySearch profile has evolved into several incarnations as they upgraded their databases. But they have all used the profile ID as a parameter.) But this might also support parameter passing for a Repository (that might be a Document Management System, traditional library, or the Wayback Machine internet archive) holding a copy of the source.

-Brian

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 2:31, Nico Rikken
First: thank you all for this great software, documentation and community!


Backstory
I have compiled my family tree from three relatives of different sides of the family using both a GEDCOM and manual import.

Two of them will continue on with their trees, and so I'd like to keep a reference to their trees around. Each tree has their own ID system.
Initially I considered keeping the trees of all 2 sides of the trees of me and my wife seperate (so 4 trees), but having them all in one view is insightful, as most come from the same region. For example going by online published trees there should be a connection in my parents trees in the past, although I need to verify this.
I started out offsetting the Gramps IDs in the thousands, but as one of the treeds grew larger than 1000, this required a complete renumbering. Not great.

Question
The new solution I came up with, is by introducing a custom attribute for each of the original trees. Then I can keep the numbers in there. But I haven't found a way to add a custom attribute. Is this possible? Where can I do that, and is this a supported use-case?


If I'm going about this the wrong way, please tell me so. I'm still quite a beginner, so tips are welcome.

Kind regards,
Nico Rikken, NL

--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org

--
Verstuurd vanaf mijn Android apparaat met K-9 Mail. Excuseer mijn beknoptheid.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org