Name editor and search filter: clarification needed

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

Name editor and search filter: clarification needed

Patrick Gerlier

Hi all,

Thanks to the name editor, I can record alternate names for a person.

This is handy when a record officer makes a misspelling and this misspelling becomes afterward the official name of the family.

I have this case with a "Paume" family during XVII-XVIIIth family. By the second half of the XVIIIth century, a newly stationed priest (obsviously not native of this village) began to record birth, death, marriages under the name "Paulme".

Some of the people are known in the records under both names. Consequently, they have an alternate name entry. While their descendants in the XIXth century only have the newer name.

To be able to search/group the whole family line, no matter which spelling is used, I entered a "group by" entry as "Paume or Paulme" for all members of this line.

However, when I filter people with "Paume", I don't get the same results as when I filter with "Paume".

I checked that all records have the same "group by" entry. I even removed everything from the shorter filtered results and reentered afresh the "group by" data, making sure I had no misspelling. This didn't change the results.

Did I miss something?

Patrick



--
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: Name editor and search filter: clarification needed

Dave Scheipers
Hi Patrick

I use the Group As often.

The Group As does not actually change the name in any person's record.

And we need to understand which search searches what.  In a list view,
with the side bar closed, there is search bar. You can search "Name
contains" or "Name does not contain".  Whatever name (or part of name)
you enter, will only search the name entries from the list. It
searches the list, not each person record. This search does not
include alternate names.

Search by name in the side bar filter will search all name entries,
including alternates. But in the Name field search, you can only
search one option. No Boolean  and/or searches.

Your best bet is to create a Filter rule with all name options with
the rule that at least one of rules must apply.

>> General Filters >> People with the <name>  >> Single Surname = Paume
>> General Filters >> People with the <name>  >> Single Surname = Paulme

Options: At least one rule must apply

https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Gramps_5.1_Wiki_Manual_-_Filters#Custom_Filters

Making a rule remains available for reuse as well as adding this rule
to other rules.

HTH Dave


On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 12:03 PM Patrick Gerlier <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks to the name editor, I can record alternate names for a person.
>
> This is handy when a record officer makes a misspelling and this misspelling becomes afterward the official name of the family.
>
> I have this case with a "Paume" family during XVII-XVIIIth family. By the second half of the XVIIIth century, a newly stationed priest (obsviously not native of this village) began to record birth, death, marriages under the name "Paulme".
>
> Some of the people are known in the records under both names. Consequently, they have an alternate name entry. While their descendants in the XIXth century only have the newer name.
>
> To be able to search/group the whole family line, no matter which spelling is used, I entered a "group by" entry as "Paume or Paulme" for all members of this line.
>
> However, when I filter people with "Paume", I don't get the same results as when I filter with "Paume".
>
> I checked that all records have the same "group by" entry. I even removed everything from the shorter filtered results and reentered afresh the "group by" data, making sure I had no misspelling. This didn't change the results.
>
> Did I miss something?
>
> Patrick
>
> --
> 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: Name editor and search filter: clarification needed

GRAMPS - User mailing list
In reply to this post by Patrick Gerlier

Hi All

This one set me thinking of something that vaguely irritates me

If we have all the grouped people in a collapsed view
Why does the Group name not have the names within the group displayed

So currently you would see
Group A
Group B
Group C

Why cannot it be
Group A, A1, A2, A3
Group B, B1, B2, B3
Group C, C1, C2, C3

So you can see at a glance any grouped names without having to expand
the Group

Just a thought


Regards
Phil
MLFHS 12583
Dumfries
On 19/12/2019 17:02, Patrick Gerlier wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks to the name editor, I can record alternate names for a person.
>
> This is handy when a record officer makes a misspelling and this
> misspelling becomes afterward the official name of the family.
>
> I have this case with a "Paume" family during XVII-XVIIIth family. By
> the second half of the XVIIIth century, a newly stationed priest
> (obsviously not native of this village) began to record birth, death,
> marriages under the name "Paulme".
>
> Some of the people are known in the records under both names.
> Consequently, they have an alternate name entry. While their descendants
> in the XIXth century only have the newer name.
>
> To be able to search/group the whole family line, no matter which
> spelling is used, I entered a "group by" entry as "Paume or Paulme" for
> all members of this line.
>
> However, when I filter people with "Paume", I don't get the same results
> as when I filter with "Paume".
>
> I checked that *all* records have the same "group by" entry. I even
> removed everything from the shorter filtered results and reentered
> afresh the "group by" data, making sure I had no misspelling. This
> didn't change the results.
>
> Did I miss something?
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>


--
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: Name editor and search filter: clarification needed

Dave Scheipers
Hi Phil

That was my AHA moment.

Instead of only setting only one set of names to another more common
option, set ALL the names to the same Group as.

See https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Grouping_Surnames

So instead of "Wharam" grouped as "Wharrum", set BOTH names to
"Wharrum (Wharum)"

"Wharam" grouped as "Wharrum (Wharum)" and
"Wharram" grouped as "Wharrum (Wharum)"

Patrick indicated he uses "Name1 or Name2" which would also work.

And of course, more than two names can be included under the same Group As.

As I have been exchanging with him, the Group As is a Gramps function,
so it does not alter any records.

Dave

On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 1:36 PM phil wharram via Gramps-users
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> Hi All
>
> This one set me thinking of something that vaguely irritates me
>
> If we have all the grouped people in a collapsed view
> Why does the Group name not have the names within the group displayed
>
> So currently you would see
> Group A
> Group B
> Group C
>
> Why cannot it be
> Group A, A1, A2, A3
> Group B, B1, B2, B3
> Group C, C1, C2, C3
>
> So you can see at a glance any grouped names without having to expand
> the Group
>
> Just a thought
>
>
> Regards
> Phil
> MLFHS 12583
> Dumfries
> On 19/12/2019 17:02, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Thanks to the name editor, I can record alternate names for a person.
> >
> > This is handy when a record officer makes a misspelling and this
> > misspelling becomes afterward the official name of the family.
> >
> > I have this case with a "Paume" family during XVII-XVIIIth family. By
> > the second half of the XVIIIth century, a newly stationed priest
> > (obsviously not native of this village) began to record birth, death,
> > marriages under the name "Paulme".
> >
> > Some of the people are known in the records under both names.
> > Consequently, they have an alternate name entry. While their descendants
> > in the XIXth century only have the newer name.
> >
> > To be able to search/group the whole family line, no matter which
> > spelling is used, I entered a "group by" entry as "Paume or Paulme" for
> > all members of this line.
> >
> > However, when I filter people with "Paume", I don't get the same results
> > as when I filter with "Paume".
> >
> > I checked that *all* records have the same "group by" entry. I even
> > removed everything from the shorter filtered results and reentered
> > afresh the "group by" data, making sure I had no misspelling. This
> > didn't change the results.
> >
> > Did I miss something?
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> 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: Name editor and search filter: clarification needed

Patrick Gerlier
Hi Phil,

To make things  even clearer, the Group As key is not at all related
with any name.

Suppose you want to quickly select a very tiny group of persons
inhabiting a small isolated endogamic hamlet XYZZY. These people bear
the unique (not seen elsewhere) names of Hamsmith, Letthompson, Hamjones
and Letjones.

You can give all this names the Grapup As key "XYZZY" and they will
display together in the list.

Note my example is a bit contorted because you can select them from
place name XYZZY. You can tranpose my example to a more sensible "King
Rex's descendants" key.

Patrick

Le 19/12/2019 à 20:33, Dave Scheipers a écrit :

> Hi Phil
>
> That was my AHA moment.
>
> Instead of only setting only one set of names to another more common
> option, set ALL the names to the same Group as.
>
> See https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Grouping_Surnames
>
> So instead of "Wharam" grouped as "Wharrum", set BOTH names to
> "Wharrum (Wharum)"
>
> "Wharam" grouped as "Wharrum (Wharum)" and
> "Wharram" grouped as "Wharrum (Wharum)"
>
> Patrick indicated he uses "Name1 or Name2" which would also work.
>
> And of course, more than two names can be included under the same Group As.
>
> As I have been exchanging with him, the Group As is a Gramps function,
> so it does not alter any records.
>
> Dave
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 1:36 PM phil wharram via Gramps-users
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All
>>
>> This one set me thinking of something that vaguely irritates me
>>
>> If we have all the grouped people in a collapsed view
>> Why does the Group name not have the names within the group displayed
>>
>> So currently you would see
>> Group A
>> Group B
>> Group C
>>
>> Why cannot it be
>> Group A, A1, A2, A3
>> Group B, B1, B2, B3
>> Group C, C1, C2, C3
>>
>> So you can see at a glance any grouped names without having to expand
>> the Group
>>
>> Just a thought
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Phil
>> MLFHS 12583
>> Dumfries
>> On 19/12/2019 17:02, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
>



--
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: Name editor and search filter: clarification needed

GRAMPS - User mailing list
In reply to this post by Dave Scheipers


Hi Dave/Patrick
Couple of interesting work rounds thanks will have a play see which
works best for me

Regards
Phil
MLFHS 12583
Dumfries

On 19/12/2019 19:33, Dave Scheipers wrote:

> Hi Phil
>
> That was my AHA moment.
>
> Instead of only setting only one set of names to another more common
> option, set ALL the names to the same Group as.
>
> See https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Grouping_Surnames
>
> So instead of "Wharam" grouped as "Wharrum", set BOTH names to
> "Wharrum (Wharum)"
>
> "Wharam" grouped as "Wharrum (Wharum)" and
> "Wharram" grouped as "Wharrum (Wharum)"
>
> Patrick indicated he uses "Name1 or Name2" which would also work.
>
> And of course, more than two names can be included under the same Group As.
>
> As I have been exchanging with him, the Group As is a Gramps function,
> so it does not alter any records.
>
> Dave
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 1:36 PM phil wharram via Gramps-users
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi All
>>
>> This one set me thinking of something that vaguely irritates me
>>
>> If we have all the grouped people in a collapsed view
>> Why does the Group name not have the names within the group displayed
>>
>> So currently you would see
>> Group A
>> Group B
>> Group C
>>
>> Why cannot it be
>> Group A, A1, A2, A3
>> Group B, B1, B2, B3
>> Group C, C1, C2, C3
>>
>> So you can see at a glance any grouped names without having to expand
>> the Group
>>
>> Just a thought
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Phil
>> MLFHS 12583
>> Dumfries
>> On 19/12/2019 17:02, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Thanks to the name editor, I can record alternate names for a person.
>>>
>>> This is handy when a record officer makes a misspelling and this
>>> misspelling becomes afterward the official name of the family.
>>>
>>> I have this case with a "Paume" family during XVII-XVIIIth family. By
>>> the second half of the XVIIIth century, a newly stationed priest
>>> (obsviously not native of this village) began to record birth, death,
>>> marriages under the name "Paulme".
>>>
>>> Some of the people are known in the records under both names.
>>> Consequently, they have an alternate name entry. While their descendants
>>> in the XIXth century only have the newer name.
>>>
>>> To be able to search/group the whole family line, no matter which
>>> spelling is used, I entered a "group by" entry as "Paume or Paulme" for
>>> all members of this line.
>>>
>>> However, when I filter people with "Paume", I don't get the same results
>>> as when I filter with "Paume".
>>>
>>> I checked that *all* records have the same "group by" entry. I even
>>> removed everything from the shorter filtered results and reentered
>>> afresh the "group by" data, making sure I had no misspelling. This
>>> didn't change the results.
>>>
>>> Did I miss something?
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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