Fwd: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

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

Fwd: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

GRAMPS - User mailing list
Hi everybody,

Places can be "enclosed by" other places. I use this feature to record
State>Province>District>town, village or hamlet hierarchy.

It is easy to deal with leaf (last element) name change as the
relationship "enclosed by" can be given a timespan which is a property
of this single occurrence (as opposed to the name record which is a
global one).

During History, borders of the upper-level entities have varied a lot,
e.g. after a treaty ending a war. This can also be managed through the
timespan for "enclosed by" relationship. However, this relationship has
a more "general" value and impacts many towns, villages or hamlets or
province to districts list in case of more profound changes.

Presently, I create the state, province, districts places and give them
the required timespan bounds. They are not numerous, so it does not
matter to do it manually. When it comes to lowest-level places, which
are really numerous, I'd like to associate the appropriately flagged
district without having to explicitly describe the "enclosed by" time
attributes.

I haven't found how to do it: the name of "district" is a shared record
(only one occurrence in the data base) while the timespan must
apparently be entered for every place included in the district.

This kind of data has an intermediate status between the name of the
place (permanent, unique, one occurrence for all uses) and a really individual property
needing one description per use.

If I didn't read correctly the manual, could you point me to the chapter
I disregarded?

To illustrate the case, think of Germany up to century XVIII with tons
of small kingdoms, principalities, duchies, episcopal see, transformed
into an Empire during century XIX, becoming then a republic after 1918, etc.

Is there a way, once you created the "state" hierarchy to use it without
recoding it for every village?

Regards,
André



_______________________________________________
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: Fwd: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

Nick Hall
On 18/11/2018 13:26, ajlittoz via Gramps-users wrote:
> Places can be "enclosed by" other places. I use this feature to record
> State>Province>District>town, village or hamlet hierarchy.

We use a subset of the GEDCOM-L standard:

http://genwiki.genealogy.net/GEDCOM/PLAC-Tag

Have a look at the GOV database:

http://gov.genealogy.net/search/index

They also have some help pages which may be indirectly useful, although
Gramps doesn't use the Quicktext format:

http://wiki-de.genealogy.net/GOV/Quicktext

For German places, consider using the GOV gramplet in our third-party
repository.

Regards,


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: Fwd: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

prculley
In reply to this post by GRAMPS - User mailing list
Is there a way, once you created the "state" hierarchy to use it without
recoding it for every village?
No, Gramps does not support this.  What you are asking for is a way to describe a geographical region and name it different things depending on the time.  And then have places enclosed by that region inherit the appropriate enclosing name for that time.

As Nick pointed out, that is not how Gramps (or most of the known gazetteers, like GOV database) work.  Using the GOV database on each of the places you are interested in is probably the easiest way to get the enclosures close to correct (close to, because the GOV database is not always complete or correct).

Paul C.

On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 7:27 AM ajlittoz via Gramps-users <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everybody,

Places can be "enclosed by" other places. I use this feature to record
State>Province>District>town, village or hamlet hierarchy.

It is easy to deal with leaf (last element) name change as the
relationship "enclosed by" can be given a timespan which is a property
of this single occurrence (as opposed to the name record which is a
global one).

During History, borders of the upper-level entities have varied a lot,
e.g. after a treaty ending a war. This can also be managed through the
timespan for "enclosed by" relationship. However, this relationship has
a more "general" value and impacts many towns, villages or hamlets or
province to districts list in case of more profound changes.

Presently, I create the state, province, districts places and give them
the required timespan bounds. They are not numerous, so it does not
matter to do it manually. When it comes to lowest-level places, which
are really numerous, I'd like to associate the appropriately flagged
district without having to explicitly describe the "enclosed by" time
attributes.

I haven't found how to do it: the name of "district" is a shared record
(only one occurrence in the data base) while the timespan must
apparently be entered for every place included in the district.

This kind of data has an intermediate status between the name of the
place (permanent, unique, one occurrence for all uses) and a really individual property
needing one description per use.

If I didn't read correctly the manual, could you point me to the chapter
I disregarded?

To illustrate the case, think of Germany up to century XVIII with tons
of small kingdoms, principalities, duchies, episcopal see, transformed
into an Empire during century XIX, becoming then a republic after 1918, etc.

Is there a way, once you created the "state" hierarchy to use it without
recoding it for every village?

Regards,
André



_______________________________________________
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: Fwd: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

Doug-11
In reply to this post by GRAMPS - User mailing list
On 18/11/2018 13:26, ajlittoz via Gramps-users wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> Places can be "enclosed by" other places. I use this
> feature to record
> State>Province>District>town, village or hamlet hierarchy.
>
> It is easy to deal with leaf (last element) name change as
> the
> relationship "enclosed by" can be given a timespan which
> is a property
> of this single occurrence (as opposed to the name record
> which is a
> global one).
>
> During History, borders of the upper-level entities have
> varied a lot,
> e.g. after a treaty ending a war. This can also be managed
> through the
> timespan for "enclosed by" relationship. However, this
> relationship has
> a more "general" value and impacts many towns, villages or
> hamlets or
> province to districts list in case of more profound changes.
>
> Presently, I create the state, province, districts places
> and give them
> the required timespan bounds. They are not numerous, so it
> does not
> matter to do it manually. When it comes to lowest-level
> places, which
> are really numerous, I'd like to associate the
> appropriately flagged
> district without having to explicitly describe the
> "enclosed by" time
> attributes.
>
> I haven't found how to do it: the name of "district" is a
> shared record
> (only one occurrence in the data base) while the timespan
> must
> apparently be entered for every place included in the
> district.
>
> This kind of data has an intermediate status between the
> name of the
> place (permanent, unique, one occurrence for all uses) and
> a really individual property
> needing one description per use.
>
> If I didn't read correctly the manual, could you point me
> to the chapter
> I disregarded?
>
> To illustrate the case, think of Germany up to century
> XVIII with tons
> of small kingdoms, principalities, duchies, episcopal see,
> transformed
> into an Empire during century XIX, becoming then a
> republic after 1918, etc.
>
> Is there a way, once you created the "state" hierarchy to
> use it without
> recoding it for every village?
>
> Regards,
> André

I think I understand your question; but please excuse if
I've got it wrong.

The way to record hamlet, village, district, county, etc (or
analogous hierarchy) is usually:

hamlet,

enclosed by [no date range], village

enclosed by [no date range], district

enclosed by [from date1 to date2], county

enclosed by [from date3 to date4], next level...... etc.

That is to say, *don't* put in a date or date range unless
the particular hamlet/village/county or whatever actually
changed at some time.

The place tree will construct a correct place title for any
event (or what-have-you) according to which dates are valid
at the time of the event you're recording. However if the
date spans you set at different levels clash with one
another you'll get an error which the place title will flag up.

There was quite a lot of discussion at the time the place
hierarchy was being designed and introduced - it might be
worth your while looking at the mailing list archives around
late November 2016 on topics like "Dated Place Names". How
errors are flagged; and situations which are still ambiguous
were among the things that came up.

Doug





_______________________________________________
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: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

Doug-11
This sounds it might be similar to the problem I had with
Poland and its numerous changes, splitting and reforming
over the centuries.

My ad hoc solution was to create a new Place 'POLAND' with a
new Type I called 'Root' - with no date. This allowed me to
enclose the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Kingdom of
Poland, Republic of Poland, Second Polish Republic, Congress
Poland, etc.etc. each with their appropriate date range. The
place title then builds correctly - always with the addition
of POLAND at the end, of course, only a small niggle.

Doug

On 19/11/2018 11:17, ajlittoz wrote:

> I experimented with an alternate strategy to try and cope
> with "improvable" information (i.e. I discover a more
> accurate date for the administrative organisation and I want
> to update my places list from a single location).
>
> I used the "alternate names" for state/province/county with
> time span dates. Apparently, I cannot tag the main name with
> a time span. Consequently, the main name is always used to
> build the place title.
>
> There seems to be no other solution than the one you
> describe below (I already use it). Thanks for your time.
>
> André
>
>
> Le 19/11/2018 à 01:05, Doug a écrit :
>> I think I understand your question; but please excuse if
>> I've got it wrong.
>>
>> The way to record hamlet, village, district, county, etc
>> (or analogous hierarchy) is usually:
>>
>> hamlet,
>>
>> enclosed by [no date range], village
>>
>> enclosed by [no date range], district
>>
>> enclosed by [from date1 to date2], county
>>
>> enclosed by [from date3 to date4], next level...... etc.
>>
>> That is to say, *don't* put in a date or date range unless
>> the particular hamlet/village/county or whatever actually
>> changed at some time.
>>
>> The place tree will construct a correct place title for
>> any event (or what-have-you) according to which dates are
>> valid at the time of the event you're recording. However
>> if the date spans you set at different levels clash with
>> one another you'll get an error which the place title will
>> flag up.
>>
>> There was quite a lot of discussion at the time the place
>> hierarchy was being designed and introduced - it might be
>> worth your while looking at the mailing list archives
>> around late November 2016 on topics like "Dated Place
>> Names". How errors are flagged; and situations which are
>> still ambiguous were among the things that came up.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>>
>>
>
>



_______________________________________________
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: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

Dave Scheipers
Hi Doug

I have a place called "Oceans" that I aggregate all the oceans under.
When I put an ocean under "Oceans" I give the date "1 Jan 1" as the
enclosed by date.. So unless the ship sank on "1 Jan 1", the Place
displays as "North Atlantic Ocean".  A handy trick when you want the
place in its proper hierarchy (or in the ocean case, easier to find)
but you do not want the complete hierarchy to display.

I use this trick for the more famous universities. "Harvard
University" is enclosed by Cambridge.... with the enclosed by date "1
Jan 1". This only makes sense when the place is so well known no one
would not know where the event happened.

Dave
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:20 AM Doug <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> This sounds it might be similar to the problem I had with
> Poland and its numerous changes, splitting and reforming
> over the centuries.
>
> My ad hoc solution was to create a new Place 'POLAND' with a
> new Type I called 'Root' - with no date. This allowed me to
> enclose the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Kingdom of
> Poland, Republic of Poland, Second Polish Republic, Congress
> Poland, etc.etc. each with their appropriate date range. The
> place title then builds correctly - always with the addition
> of POLAND at the end, of course, only a small niggle.
>
> Doug
>
> On 19/11/2018 11:17, ajlittoz wrote:
> > I experimented with an alternate strategy to try and cope
> > with "improvable" information (i.e. I discover a more
> > accurate date for the administrative organisation and I want
> > to update my places list from a single location).
> >
> > I used the "alternate names" for state/province/county with
> > time span dates. Apparently, I cannot tag the main name with
> > a time span. Consequently, the main name is always used to
> > build the place title.
> >
> > There seems to be no other solution than the one you
> > describe below (I already use it). Thanks for your time.
> >
> > André
> >
> >
> > Le 19/11/2018 à  01:05, Doug a écrit :
> >> I think I understand your question; but please excuse if
> >> I've got it wrong.
> >>
> >> The way to record hamlet, village, district, county, etc
> >> (or analogous hierarchy) is usually:
> >>
> >> hamlet,
> >>
> >> enclosed by [no date range], village
> >>
> >> enclosed by [no date range], district
> >>
> >> enclosed by [from date1 to date2], county
> >>
> >> enclosed by [from date3 to date4], next level...... etc.
> >>
> >> That is to say, *don't* put in a date or date range unless
> >> the particular hamlet/village/county or whatever actually
> >> changed at some time.
> >>
> >> The place tree will construct a correct place title for
> >> any event (or what-have-you) according to which dates are
> >> valid at the time of the event you're recording. However
> >> if the date spans you set at different levels clash with
> >> one another you'll get an error which the place title will
> >> flag up.
> >>
> >> There was quite a lot of discussion at the time the place
> >> hierarchy was being designed and introduced - it might be
> >> worth your while looking at the mailing list archives
> >> around late November 2016 on topics like "Dated Place
> >> Names". How errors are flagged; and situations which are
> >> still ambiguous were among the things that came up.
> >>
> >> Doug
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

Doug-11
Hi Dave,

I like it!

Another of my POLAND tricks was to create "Age of
Partitions" as a Type "Period" place that allowed me to
group together the dismembered bits of Poland after
Napoleon's defeat.

Another trick was to define Event Types "ship departure",
"Port of Call", "ship destination" and "ship return" in
order to track an ancestor who was a ship's doctor and
animate the display of his voyages. The Event Description
was the name of the ship. The main participant was my
ancestor, others sharing in it were, for example, the ship's
captain.

Maybe we should have a Cunning Tricks Wiki or something
similar to keep these helpful dodges available for people.

Doug

On 19/11/2018 18:42, Dave Scheipers wrote:

> Hi Doug
>
> I have a place called "Oceans" that I aggregate all the oceans under.
> When I put an ocean under "Oceans" I give the date "1 Jan 1" as the
> enclosed by date.. So unless the ship sank on "1 Jan 1", the Place
> displays as "North Atlantic Ocean".  A handy trick when you want the
> place in its proper hierarchy (or in the ocean case, easier to find)
> but you do not want the complete hierarchy to display.
>
> I use this trick for the more famous universities. "Harvard
> University" is enclosed by Cambridge.... with the enclosed by date "1
> Jan 1". This only makes sense when the place is so well known no one
> would not know where the event happened.
>
> Dave
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:20 AM Doug <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> This sounds it might be similar to the problem I had with
>> Poland and its numerous changes, splitting and reforming
>> over the centuries.
>>
>> My ad hoc solution was to create a new Place 'POLAND' with a
>> new Type I called 'Root' - with no date. This allowed me to
>> enclose the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Kingdom of
>> Poland, Republic of Poland, Second Polish Republic, Congress
>> Poland, etc.etc. each with their appropriate date range. The
>> place title then builds correctly - always with the addition
>> of POLAND at the end, of course, only a small niggle.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>> On 19/11/2018 11:17, ajlittoz wrote:
>>> I experimented with an alternate strategy to try and cope
>>> with "improvable" information (i.e. I discover a more
>>> accurate date for the administrative organisation and I want
>>> to update my places list from a single location).
>>>
>>> I used the "alternate names" for state/province/county with
>>> time span dates. Apparently, I cannot tag the main name with
>>> a time span. Consequently, the main name is always used to
>>> build the place title.
>>>
>>> There seems to be no other solution than the one you
>>> describe below (I already use it). Thanks for your time.
>>>
>>> André
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 19/11/2018 à  01:05, Doug a écrit :
>>>> I think I understand your question; but please excuse if
>>>> I've got it wrong.
>>>>
>>>> The way to record hamlet, village, district, county, etc
>>>> (or analogous hierarchy) is usually:
>>>>
>>>> hamlet,
>>>>
>>>> enclosed by [no date range], village
>>>>
>>>> enclosed by [no date range], district
>>>>
>>>> enclosed by [from date1 to date2], county
>>>>
>>>> enclosed by [from date3 to date4], next level...... etc.
>>>>
>>>> That is to say, *don't* put in a date or date range unless
>>>> the particular hamlet/village/county or whatever actually
>>>> changed at some time.
>>>>
>>>> The place tree will construct a correct place title for
>>>> any event (or what-have-you) according to which dates are
>>>> valid at the time of the event you're recording. However
>>>> if the date spans you set at different levels clash with
>>>> one another you'll get an error which the place title will
>>>> flag up.
>>>>
>>>> There was quite a lot of discussion at the time the place
>>>> hierarchy was being designed and introduced - it might be
>>>> worth your while looking at the mailing list archives
>>>> around late November 2016 on topics like "Dated Place
>>>> Names". How errors are flagged; and situations which are
>>>> still ambiguous were among the things that came up.
>>>>
>>>> Doug
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: Share places time-dependent hierarchy

Nick Hall
On 20/11/2018 15:25, Doug wrote:
> Maybe we should have a Cunning Tricks Wiki or something similar to
> keep these helpful dodges available for people.

Feel free to create a wiki page.

Nick.




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