Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

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

Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

John W. Kitz-3
All,

Could someone with experience with the use of the Group as function in the
name editor please provide a brief explanation of its use.

I.e. am I correct in assuming it provides for a means to groups e.g. the
following patronymic names: Jochum Tjeerds, his son Halbe Jochums and his
son Johannes Halbes and finally his son Halbe Johannes under one (either
fictitious or real patrilineal) name e.g. for sorting purposes in the People
screens?

Regards, Jk.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

John W. Kitz-3
Brian,

On 2017-12-14 16:21, wrote:
> I am curious how to determine which name in a list of multiple
> surnames will be used for grouping.

In the example I used to illustrate my question there are no family- or
surnames, only first/given names and patronyms. The four individuals I
used in the example are actual individuals that used to live in the
North-East of what we now refer to as The Netherlands during the 1700
and 1800's, which at the time, if I'm not mistaking, extended a bit
further to the East, in what we now refer to as Germany.

The point of my question is this:

If Gramps interprets patronymic names as surnames the names in the
example result in four surnames, Tjeerds, Jochums, Halbes and Johannes
respectively, but since they are not family- or surnames as we typically
use them today, after all they are patronymic in nature or derived from
the first names of the fathers, there is a considerable chance I'll at
some point encounter more individuals with the same first names and,
provided they at some point have children, patronymic names of their
children making it hard if not impossible to distinguish between members
of the same family unless the 'Group as' function in the name editor
does what I assume it does (see my initial email).

So I'd like to have an opinion on that from someone with experience in
using the Group as function and how it affects the data entered.

> For instance, when I enter the bride in a Married relationship and
> only know her Given name, I enter "U.L.N." for her Birth name. (My
> grandmother used ULN as a placeholder in her paper genealogies. Years
> later, I've found "Uln" misinterpreted in online genealogies to be an
> actual surname with people trying to find an Uln progenitor.) I add a
> multiple surname second line for her the taken surname of her husband.
>
> This works pretty well except when later discovering that what I
> thought was a maiden surname was actually a subsequent marriage of a
> widow/divorcee. Then I add another line for the maiden name and move
> it upwards to the first line.
>
> But it's hard to determine which surname line in a multiple surname
> will be used for indexing during grouping.
>
> I'm also confused whether the Prefix is considered or ignored during
> grouping. I would prefer that it be ignored.  When something like a
> "de la Rosa" anglicizes into "DeRosa", I include an alternate spelling
> for that generation and stop using the prefix field in the following
> generation.
>
> But it would be nice if grouping was indexed on the 1st item of the
> manually controlled display order in the multiple surnames. (Although
> for that "indexing order" to survive a re-indexing, it might require a
> new indexing field... like the "#" field for the birth order of
> children in the Family dialog & Relationships-Siblings subpanel.)
>
> Brian

Regards, Jk.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

Dave Scheipers
Hi John & Brian

I have looked at this function and have found it less than satisfactory.

Its stated purpose is to group family surnames, that while related,
have variations in spellings (Smith & Smyth) or grouping the male
patronymic and its female counterpart (Ivanov & Ivanova) under a
common grouping. The grouping occurs only in the Grouped People view
list. It has no effect on the display name. I've looked at this
function when looking at hyphenated surnames with the idea of grouping
them under one or the other singular surname.

The problem I have is that the sort within the grouping remains set to
what was set in preferences or even the override in the name editor,
But unless the default display name setting starts with the Given
name, the surname differences, even though grouped, keeps the people
with different surnames segregated.

While I print reports using Given Surname (including all the extras)
while working the database, I keep the Surname, Given (+ extras) as my
standard. And this may be a case where old habits need to die. Using
the grouping function it makes sense to use Given Surname as the basic
name model.

I may need another think on the subject.

Not having kept using the Grouping past seeing what it does, the one
question I have would be how the global set function would affect new
individuals. When setting a person with the name Smyth to group with
people with the name Smith, there is the added option to do it for
just that one person or all people named Smyth. What happens when you
add a new person named Smyth? Will the grouping be automatic? Or you
find that they are not actually a Smyth but a Jones. What happens to
the existing grouping then? Unless someone has the experience, maybe
I'll take the time to test it and let you know.

I hope this helps. And while I wrote this, I came to understand why I
was not thrilled with the function and maybe I can change my habits to
get past it because I do see the pluses the function offers.

Dave

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:59 AM, John W. Kitz <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Brian,
>
> On 2017-12-14 16:21, wrote:
>>
>> I am curious how to determine which name in a list of multiple
>> surnames will be used for grouping.
>
>
> In the example I used to illustrate my question there are no family- or
> surnames, only first/given names and patronyms. The four individuals I used
> in the example are actual individuals that used to live in the North-East of
> what we now refer to as The Netherlands during the 1700 and 1800's, which at
> the time, if I'm not mistaking, extended a bit further to the East, in what
> we now refer to as Germany.
>
> The point of my question is this:
>
> If Gramps interprets patronymic names as surnames the names in the example
> result in four surnames, Tjeerds, Jochums, Halbes and Johannes respectively,
> but since they are not family- or surnames as we typically use them today,
> after all they are patronymic in nature or derived from the first names of
> the fathers, there is a considerable chance I'll at some point encounter
> more individuals with the same first names and, provided they at some point
> have children, patronymic names of their children making it hard if not
> impossible to distinguish between members of the same family unless the
> 'Group as' function in the name editor does what I assume it does (see my
> initial email).
>
> So I'd like to have an opinion on that from someone with experience in using
> the Group as function and how it affects the data entered.
>
>> For instance, when I enter the bride in a Married relationship and
>> only know her Given name, I enter "U.L.N." for her Birth name. (My
>> grandmother used ULN as a placeholder in her paper genealogies. Years
>> later, I've found "Uln" misinterpreted in online genealogies to be an
>> actual surname with people trying to find an Uln progenitor.) I add a
>> multiple surname second line for her the taken surname of her husband.
>>
>> This works pretty well except when later discovering that what I
>> thought was a maiden surname was actually a subsequent marriage of a
>> widow/divorcee. Then I add another line for the maiden name and move
>> it upwards to the first line.
>>
>> But it's hard to determine which surname line in a multiple surname
>> will be used for indexing during grouping.
>>
>> I'm also confused whether the Prefix is considered or ignored during
>> grouping. I would prefer that it be ignored.  When something like a
>> "de la Rosa" anglicizes into "DeRosa", I include an alternate spelling
>> for that generation and stop using the prefix field in the following
>> generation.
>>
>> But it would be nice if grouping was indexed on the 1st item of the
>> manually controlled display order in the multiple surnames. (Although
>> for that "indexing order" to survive a re-indexing, it might require a
>> new indexing field... like the "#" field for the birth order of
>> children in the Family dialog & Relationships-Siblings subpanel.)
>>
>> Brian
>
>
> Regards, Jk.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

John W. Kitz-3
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
All,

On 2017-12-14 11:47, John W. Kitz wrote:

> All,
>
> Could someone with experience with the use of the Group as function in
> the
> name editor please provide a brief explanation of its use.
>
> I.e. am I correct in assuming it provides for a means to groups e.g.
> the
> following patronymic names: Jochum Tjeerds, his son Halbe Jochums and
> his
> son Johannes Halbes and finally his son Halbe Johannes under one
> (either
> fictitious or real patrilineal) name e.g. for sorting purposes in the
> People screens?

Considering the replies to this post as well as having now looked at it
myself, the answer to my question (above) at first glance would appear
to be Yes.

Regards, Jk.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

John W. Kitz-3
In reply to this post by Dave Scheipers
Dave, Brian, (and all),

On 2017-12-14 21:58, Dave Scheipers wrote:
> Hi John & Brian
>
> I have looked at this function and have found it less than
> satisfactory.
>
> Its stated purpose is to group family surnames, that while related,
> have variations in spellings (Smith & Smyth) or grouping the male
> patronymic and its female counterpart (Ivanov & Ivanova) under a
> common grouping.

What I didn't realize when posting my initial question is that a name
(be it a first, last or patronymic name) is derived from other values,
such as a name's origin, entered in Gramps, or in other words the
position in which (a portion of) a name appears has, other than to us
humans, no meaning to Gramps.

> The grouping occurs only in the Grouped People view
> list. It has no effect on the display name.

That was exactly what I was looking for.

Per, I believe an earlier email exchange I had with you, I added a
custom name format (of the form 'Given Patronymic[sur]') to affect the,
in my opinion, proper way of displaying the name of the individual(s)
concerned.

> I've looked at this
> function when looking at hyphenated surnames with the idea of grouping
> them under one or the other singular surname.
>
> The problem I have is that the sort within the grouping remains set to
> what was set in preferences or even the override in the name editor,
> But unless the default display name setting starts with the Given
> name, the surname differences, even though grouped, keeps the people
> with different surnames segregated.
>
> While I print reports using Given Surname (including all the extras)
> while working the database, I keep the Surname, Given (+ extras) as my
> standard. And this may be a case where old habits need to die. Using
> the grouping function it makes sense to use Given Surname as the basic
> name model.

I don't understand what you explained above, maybe I'll come to the same
conclusion at some point in the future, but for now it looks like I've
addressed my immediate need by using a combination of the Group as: /
Override functionality in the name editor and a custom name format (see
above).

> I may need another think on the subject.
>
> Not having kept using the Grouping past seeing what it does, the one
> question I have would be how the global set function would affect new
> individuals.

Again I'm at a loss as to what you're exactly trying to convey, from the
tinkering with the Groups as and Override functions in the name editor
I've done since my initial post and using what was explained by both
Brain and you it is my understanding the effect of both functions is
specific to the name for which they are used, i.e. they do not affect
the way in which other names are treated and in that sense are not
global.

Or more cautiously stated: so far I haven't noticed any unintended or
unexpected effect on names other than the one(s) for which I used both
of functions.

> When setting a person with the name Smyth to group with
> people with the name Smith, there is the added option to do it for
> just that one person or all people named Smyth. What happens when you
> add a new person named Smyth? Will the grouping be automatic? Or you
> find that they are not actually a Smyth but a Jones. What happens to
> the existing grouping then? Unless someone has the experience, maybe
> I'll take the time to test it and let you know.

Unfortunately so far I only needed to be able to address the effects of
the transition from patronymic names to family- or surnames, so at this
time I'm unfortunately not in a position to answer the questions you
raise.

> I hope this helps.

Thanks, both Brian's and your reply sort of confirmed my initial
assumption.

As for the issue Brian raised; while I haven't looked into what he wrote
in sufficient detail to be sure, I would imagine he ought to be able to
accomplish what he is trying to using a custom name format, may be in
conjunction with the Groups as / override functions, as I had to.

> And while I wrote this, I came to understand why I
> was not thrilled with the function and maybe I can change my habits to
> get past it because I do see the pluses the function offers.
>
> Dave

Regards, Jk.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

Nick Hall
On 16/12/17 12:36, John W. Kitz wrote:
When setting a person with the name Smyth to group with
people with the name Smith, there is the added option to do it for
just that one person or all people named Smyth. What happens when you
add a new person named Smyth? Will the grouping be automatic? Or you
find that they are not actually a Smyth but a Jones. What happens to
the existing grouping then? Unless someone has the experience, maybe
I'll take the time to test it and let you know.

Unfortunately so far I only needed to be able to address the effects of the transition from patronymic names to family- or surnames, so at this time I'm unfortunately not in a position to answer the questions you raise.

The name editor allows you to define the grouping for the name and also a global name group mapping.

When determining the name group, Gramps first looks at the mapping for the name and then the global mapping.  If neither of these are defined then the primary surname is used.

Changing a surname should not affect the global mapping, although you may get presented with a dialog asking if you wish to remove it.

Searching the source code, it seems that this feature is only used in the person tree view and narrative web report.

Nick.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

Dave Scheipers
Thanks Nick

On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Nick Hall <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 16/12/17 12:36, John W. Kitz wrote:
>
> When setting a person with the name Smyth to group with
> people with the name Smith, there is the added option to do it for
> just that one person or all people named Smyth. What happens when you
> add a new person named Smyth? Will the grouping be automatic? Or you
> find that they are not actually a Smyth but a Jones. What happens to
> the existing grouping then? Unless someone has the experience, maybe
> I'll take the time to test it and let you know.
>
>
> Unfortunately so far I only needed to be able to address the effects of the
> transition from patronymic names to family- or surnames, so at this time I'm
> unfortunately not in a position to answer the questions you raise.
>
> The name editor allows you to define the grouping for the name and also a
> global name group mapping.
>
> When determining the name group, Gramps first looks at the mapping for the
> name and then the global mapping.  If neither of these are defined then the
> primary surname is used.
>
> Changing a surname should not affect the global mapping, although you may
> get presented with a dialog asking if you wish to remove it.
>
> Searching the source code, it seems that this feature is only used in the
> person tree view and narrative web report.
>
> Nick.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

John W. Kitz-3
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
Brian, (and all),

On 2017-12-14 16:21, wrote:

> For instance, when I enter the bride in a Married relationship and
> only know her Given name, I enter "U.L.N." for her Birth name. (My
> grandmother used ULN as a placeholder in her paper genealogies. Years
> later, I've found "Uln" misinterpreted in online genealogies to be an
> actual surname with people trying to find an Uln progenitor.)

: ) I sometimes use t.b.d. (short for 'to be determined') for missing first
names, but have yet to encounter someone searching for ancestors or
descendants of a mrs. or mr. T.B.D. <some-last-name>. For what it's worth I
understand the term 'Given name' to refer to someone's first name only and
consequently someone's full name to consist of the combination of someone's
Given or First and Family, Last or Surnames.

> I add a
> multiple surname second line for her the taken surname of her husband.

I don't quite understand the need to do so since the fact that a woman
enters into a marriage IMHO from a legal perspective changes nothing about
the name with which her birth was entered into a Civil Register or the name
with which she will be entered in Civil Registers after a marriage, but it
may be relevant in jurisdictions were a marriage is treated differently from
the perspective of maintaining civil and other registries.

> But it's hard to determine which surname line in a multiple surname
> will be used for indexing during grouping.

That ought to be the name that you, by means of 'right click on name' then
'set as default', decide to set as the 'preferred name' for any individual
for which you entered multiple names.

> I'm also confused whether the Prefix is considered or ignored during
> grouping. I would prefer that it be ignored.

In Dutch prefixes like van, de, van de, van den, van der, etc., are quite
common and they are typically ignored when names are grouped, which IMHO is
consistent with the way in which Dutch tend to sort names, i.e. a name like
Pieter van den Acker is sorted, or grouped like Acker van den, Pieter.
However, there may be other languages in which prefixes are considered to be
an integral part of a last name and are thus expected to be considered while
sorting too, in which case end-users would expect Pieter van den Acker to be
sorted as Van den Acker, Pieter.

> When something like a
> "de la Rosa" anglicizes into "DeRosa", I include an alternate spelling
> for that generation and stop using the prefix field in the following
> generation.

I haven't looked into the details of what you mention, but by, partly per
the email exchange between Dave and me, using a combination of (a) default
name format(s), custom name format(s), the option to override the default
sort as, display as, as well as group values it ought to be possible to
configure Gramps to behave just the way you'd prefer it to and enter a line
of descendants that starts with de la Rosa's and continues with DeRosa's as
you find them in any records, and sort, display and group them as you see
fit.

I'm sure it'll take a bit of tweaking and tinkering, but following my email
exchange with Dave I'm pretty sure it can be done.

> Brian

Success, enjoy and regards, Jk.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

Ron Johnson
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
On 12/17/2017 07:38 AM, John W. Kitz wrote:
[snip]
> However, there may be other languages in which prefixes are considered to be
> an integral part of a last name and are thus expected to be considered while
> sorting too, in which case end-users would expect Pieter van den Acker to be
> sorted as Van den Acker, Pieter.

In America, your family name is "Van den Acker", and sorted with the rest of
the V names.

--
World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

John W. Kitz-3
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
Brian,

--- 8< ---

>> When something like a
>> "de la Rosa" anglicizes into "DeRosa", I include an alternate spelling
>> for that generation and stop using the prefix field in the following
>> generation.

Having had the opportunity to look into this in even more detail, I think,
should you so prefer, it should be possible to using both the prefix 'de la'
for individuals in your data with that name prior to the name being
Anglicized and the prefix 'De' for individuals in your data with that name
after the name having been Anglicized and use a combination of a default
name format, custom name format(s), the option to override the default sort
as, display as, as well as group values to display and print the names as
'de la Rosa' and 'DeRosa' respectively and group them as e.g. 'Rosa'.
 
As I mentioned in one of my previous emails it'll probably take a bit of
tinkering, but following my email exchange with Dave I'm pretty sure Gramps
allows you to do that.

>> Brian

Regards, Jk.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
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: Explanation of the Group as function in the name editor.

Dave Scheipers
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
Hi All

I submitted two enhancements on the bug list

One is a feature request asking to have the date field show in the name list.

https://gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=10318

The second is a bug fix.

https://gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=10319

The Group As column shows the change from the surname when changed for
an individual but not on changes made for all individuals with the
same surname. The change shows in the edit screen but I think having
it show when different than the surname would be a good idea for all
records.

Dave

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 5:41 PM, John W. Kitz <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Brian,
>
> --- 8< ---
>
>>> When something like a
>>> "de la Rosa" anglicizes into "DeRosa", I include an alternate spelling
>>> for that generation and stop using the prefix field in the following
>>> generation.
>
> Having had the opportunity to look into this in even more detail, I think,
> should you so prefer, it should be possible to using both the prefix 'de la'
> for individuals in your data with that name prior to the name being
> Anglicized and the prefix 'De' for individuals in your data with that name
> after the name having been Anglicized and use a combination of a default
> name format, custom name format(s), the option to override the default sort
> as, display as, as well as group values to display and print the names as
> 'de la Rosa' and 'DeRosa' respectively and group them as e.g. 'Rosa'.
>
> As I mentioned in one of my previous emails it'll probably take a bit of
> tinkering, but following my email exchange with Dave I'm pretty sure Gramps
> allows you to do that.
>
>>> Brian
>
> Regards, Jk.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org