Is there a problem with Filters

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

Is there a problem with Filters

Robby
I am having problems with the filters on the People page.

Entering a Name returns other names as well.

Also if I enter say 1820 as a Birth or Death date then I would expect only records showing that date to appear. But it returns many more before and after that date.
I have tried using 'before 1820', 'after 1820' and 'between 1800 and 1820' and these are also wrong.

I am running Gramps 345-1 Portable and I did try a fresh install.
Does anyone else get this problem or is this version broke ?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Robby
Klaus posted a reply which appeared in my email but hasn't appeared here yet.
My reply:

Thanks Klaus. Your suggestion of using the date format '01.01.1820' didn't work either.
I take it that your version works OK ??

If you put your mouse over the input box then a help message appears with just the year eg 'between 1800 and 1900' , 'before 1850'. So this format should work.


But I think I have realised what may be happening.

A lot of the dates in my database are of the type 'about year'.
This is because for example christening dates are often in the records rather than birth date.
So the birth date becomes 'about year'.

These 'about' dates are returned regardless of the filter.
So if I filter for 1820 then I will also get dates of the sort 'about 1770'.

I think it must be the sub-program that deals with the 'about' that is broken.  
('between', 'before' and 'after' seem OK but I am not sure)  

Can someone please try this and confirm if they also have this problem.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Tony Gordon
In reply to this post by Robby
On 04/09/13 19:23, Robby wrote:

> I am having problems with the filters on the People page.
>
> Entering a Name returns other names as well.
>
> Also if I enter say 1820 as a Birth or Death date then I would expect only
> records showing that date to appear. But it returns many more before and
> after that date.
> I have tried using 'before 1820', 'after 1820' and 'between 1800 and 1820'
> and these are also wrong.
>
> I am running Gramps 345-1 Portable and I did try a fresh install.
> Does anyone else get this problem or is this version broke ?
>
>
Robby

Under Edit > Preferences > Dates you can state how many years either
side of a date you want to search. By default the 'Date about range' is
I think 50 years, but you can change this to whatever you want.

Another way to do what you want is to use the filter at the top of the
list when the sidebar is turned off. There if you enter 'Death date
contains' and '1820' you will only get 1820 deaths.

Tony

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more!
Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies
and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step
tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58040911&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Robby
Oh... that's it... I wondered if it was mis-operation on my part.
But I couldn't think why !!!

It's quite a relief as I am giving a presentation on GRAMPS tomorrow to a geneology group that I am a member of. I was a bit worried if they tried it out and found it didn't work properly.

So thanks, much appreciated.


It still doesn't explain why a search for a name returns some other names as well. But that is less of a concern.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

DS Blank
In reply to this post by Robby
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 3:23 AM, Robby <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Entering a Name returns other names as well.

I suspect that you are matching one of the person's alternate names.
For example, if you are searching for "Robby", and a person is also
known as "Robby" in an alternate name, they will match, but in the
display you will only see their primary name (eg, "Robert").

Hope that helps; Good luck with your presentation!

-Doug

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more!
Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies
and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step
tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58040911&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Doug
In reply to this post by Robby
On 04/09/13 10:45, Robby wrote:
><snip>
>
>
> It still doesn't explain why a search for a name returns some other names as
> well. But that is less of a concern.
>
<snip>

Perhaps you could check whether the extraneous names are
*spouses* of people who do belong in the search results.

There was just such a bug reported quite a long time ago (I
can't find the reference, I'm afraid). It was never dealt
with; but if you report it now, maybe it will get some
attention.

Doug


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more!
Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies
and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step
tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58040911&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Robby
Doug wrote
Perhaps you could check whether the extraneous names are
*spouses* of people who do belong in the search results.
Yes you are right they are spouses. So they should be in the list.
Still learning !!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

rider
In reply to this post by Robby
I am using 3.4.5-1 on Linux and have already reported a bug when using filters in person view, so you are not alone.  If I can get a filter to work, it does return the correct results, but as often as not, I crash.  Last time I checked, there were others who had also reported problems with filters.

rider
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Doug
In reply to this post by Robby
On 04/09/13 13:39, Robby wrote:
> Doug wrote
>> Perhaps you could check whether the extraneous names are
>> *spouses* of people who do belong in the search results.
>
> Yes you are right they are spouses. So they should be in the list.
> Still learning !!
>
>


I've just re-checked: it's still the same behaviour in 3.4.6.
However it's only *some* spouses, not all, so it's
definitely a bug.
(now reported as bug #7048).

Doug


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012, SharePoint 2013, SQL 2012, more!
Discover the easy way to master current and previous Microsoft technologies
and advance your career. Get an incredible 1,500+ hours of step-by-step
tutorial videos with LearnDevNow. Subscribe today and save!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=58041391&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Doug
On 05/09/13 19:33, doug wrote:

> On 04/09/13 13:39, Robby wrote:
>> Doug wrote
>>> Perhaps you could check whether the extraneous names are
>>> *spouses* of people who do belong in the search results.
>>
>> Yes you are right they are spouses. So they should be in the list.
>> Still learning !!
>>
>>
>
>
> I've just re-checked: it's still the same behaviour in 3.4.6.
> However it's only *some* spouses, not all, so it's
> definitely a bug.
> (now reported as bug #7048).
>
> Doug

It's now been worked over in the bug tracker; and as far as
one can tell it's *not* a bug, but I'd be grateful if you
could do a bit more checking on your family tree:

If you look at the extraneous names (the spouses) do the
names of their husbands or wives (the ones who ought to be
selected) appear under Alternative Names?


If so, can you tell us how those people got into your family
tree?

The reason I ask is that I've found a block of people in my
own tree where, for a woman, her husband's name is entered
as one of her Alternative Names; and for a man, his wife's
name appears as one of his Alternative Names. This block of
people was sent to me by a relative and imported into my
tree a long time ago, so long ago that I've now no
recollection who sent it or what form it was in, though I
guess it was GEDCOM.

I'm wondering whether my relative had entered the husband
and wife names in this peculiar fashion or whether it's a
quirk of the way gramps interpreted the data when importing it.

Do you think you spare the time to have a look?

Many thanks,

Doug

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
1. Consolidate legacy IT systems to a single system of record for IT
2. Standardize and globalize service processes across IT
3. Implement zero-touch automation to replace manual, redundant tasks
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=51271111&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Robby
>> Doug wrote
>>> Perhaps you could check whether the extraneous names are
>>> *spouses* of people who do belong in the search results.

I can confirm your findings that only certain wives maiden names appear when I search for the husbands surname. No husbands appear when I search for the wives surname.

>>If you look at the extraneous names (the spouses) do the names of their husbands or wives
>>(the ones who ought to be selected) appear under Alternative Names?

The wives maiden names that are listed have the Alternative Names listed with the married name.
The wives maiden names that should be listed, but don't, do NOT have the Alternative Names listed with the married name. So that explains why they don't appear.

It is quite difficult to spot what is absent and to get a full picture tho !!!

The husband's records do not have wives maiden names listed under the Alternative Names as far as I can see.

>>If so, can you tell us how those people got into your family tree?

All individuals on the database I checked had been manually entered by myself and I had not put any Alternative Names in as far as I can recall. So this must have been done automatically by GRAMPS. I stand to be corrected on this tho.

I thought that the differences might be because a marriage event had not been completed.
But this was not the case on several examples that I looked at ie: They all had marriage events completed.


>>in my own tree where, for a woman, her husband's name is entered as one of her Alternative Names;

Confirmed (most of the time).

>>and for a man, his wife's name appears as one of his Alternative Names.

I didn't find this on any records that I looked at. The maiden name of the wife shouldn't be on a husband's Alternative Name record should it ? That would need to be explained if different.

>>I'm wondering whether my relative had entered the husband and wife names in this peculiar fashion or whether it's a quirk of the way gramps interpreted the data when importing it.

Maybe.

The search function does seem to be working correctly.
The question does seem to be how the wives married Alternative Names (husband's surname) are entered into GRAMPS and why do some wives not have these details. Entering the marriage event doesn't seem to do it.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Douglas Bainbridge
On 12/09/13 13:48, Robby wrote:

>>> Doug wrote
>>>> Perhaps you could check whether the extraneous names are
>>>> *spouses* of people who do belong in the search results.
>
> I can confirm your findings that only certain wives maiden names appear when
> I search for the husbands surname. No husbands appear when I search for the
> wives surname.
>
>>> If you look at the extraneous names (the spouses) do the names of their
> husbands or wives
>>> (the ones who ought to be selected) appear under Alternative Names?
>
> The wives maiden names that are listed have the Alternative Names listed
> with the married name.
> The wives maiden names that should be listed, but don't, do NOT have the
> Alternative Names listed with the married name. So that explains why they
> don't appear.
>
> It is quite difficult to spot what is absent and to get a full picture tho
> !!!
>
> The husband's records do not have wives maiden names listed under the
> Alternative Names as far as I can see.
>
>>> If so, can you tell us how those people got into your family tree?
>
> All individuals on the database I checked had been manually entered by
> myself and I had not put any Alternative Names in as far as I can recall. So
> this must have been done automatically by GRAMPS. I stand to be corrected on
> this tho.
>
> I thought that the differences might be because a marriage event had not
> been completed.
> But this was not the case on several examples that I looked at ie: They all
> had marriage events completed.
>
>
>>> in my own tree where, for a woman, her husband's name is entered as one of
> her Alternative Names;
>
> Confirmed (most of the time).
>
>>> and for a man, his wife's name appears as one of his Alternative Names.
>
> I didn't find this on any records that I looked at. The maiden name of the
> wife shouldn't be on a husband's Alternative Name record should it ? That
> would need to be explained if different.
>
>>> I'm wondering whether my relative had entered the husband and wife names
> in this peculiar fashion or whether it's a quirk of the way gramps
> interpreted the data when importing it.
>
> Maybe.
>
> The search function does seem to be working correctly.
> The question does seem to be how the wives married Alternative Names
> (husband's surname) are entered into GRAMPS and why do some wives not have
> these details. Entering the marriage event doesn't seem to do it.
>
Thanks for your reply. It seems the origin of these
Alternative names is going to remain a mystery - I don't get
any of them appearing in records I enter myself (at least
now). The ones I'm complaining about *do* show the wife's
maiden name as an Alternative name for the husband, so it's
quite unlike yours.

Oh well!

Doug


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
1. Consolidate legacy IT systems to a single system of record for IT
2. Standardize and globalize service processes across IT
3. Implement zero-touch automation to replace manual, redundant tasks
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=51271111&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Is there a problem with Filters

Robby
In reply to this post by DS Blank
DS Blank wrote
I suspect that you are matching one of the person's alternate names.
For example, if you are searching for "Robby", and a person is also
known as "Robby" in an alternate name, they will match, but in the
display you will only see their primary name (eg, "Robert").

Hope that helps; Good luck with your presentation!

-Doug
Sorry not to reply earlier. As you can see we arrived at your answer the long way around.

The presentation went very well with two new GRAMPS users up and running with the portable version.
Another to follow at the next meeting when they bring their laptop.
The more experienced members are using the Ancestry.com system and think that system is better.
Maybe we can get a presentation on that so we can see the differences.