Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

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

Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

Richard Troxel
I have just discovered this Gramplet and can definitely see its usefulness. I do have a question about certain options that it presents.

In the WIKI it says,
ID field. This field displays the Gramps ID. It cannot be edited. There is a small Orig checkbox just above this field, if checked, the Original ID from the place is used instead of the found ID. Note that this checkbox is disabled if there is no original ID.
What are the pros and cons of using the GEO Id vs the original Gramps Id? What do you do?


--
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: Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

GRAMPS - User mailing list
For others not familiar with the gramplet:
This option is in the section labeled  "Result/Edit view". This view appears after pressing Find button, showing of 10 rows of results.

Using the Original Gramps ID is strategic if you have copies of your tree out with other people doing edits. (Or perhaps you've published your Tree with the automatically generated Gramps IDs or Custom IDs.) 

When you compare/merge those Revised trees, having the same ID means a new item won't be added to your Place tree. It might save you from having to merge duplicate places with different IDs.

Likewise, if you import data from other people (or files) already using a GeoNames standard ID, the databases is less likely to add duplicates if you're already using the the same standard ID naming.

-Brian

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:16, Richard Troxel
I have just discovered this Gramplet and can definitely see its usefulness. I do have a question about certain options that it presents.

In the WIKI it says,
ID field. This field displays the Gramps ID. It cannot be edited. There is a small Orig checkbox just above this field, if checked, the Original ID from the place is used instead of the found ID. Note that this checkbox is disabled if there is no original ID.
What are the pros and cons of using the GEO Id vs the original Gramps Id? What do you do?


--
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: Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

Richard Troxel
Thanks Brian!
I have not shared my database as of this time. The few "draft" reports that I have distributed (published) do not include any Gramps Id's, so these are not really considerations.

If I use the GEO Id's, should I change my Gramps ID Format settings? Does it hurt to have a mixture of Id's? I have already manually set up a number of enclosures. Part of me says that it would be less trouble to keep the Gramps Id's but I don't know if there is an advantage to the GEO Id's. Does that make sense?

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 10:42 AM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users <[hidden email]> wrote:
For others not familiar with the gramplet:
This option is in the section labeled  "Result/Edit view". This view appears after pressing Find button, showing of 10 rows of results.

Using the Original Gramps ID is strategic if you have copies of your tree out with other people doing edits. (Or perhaps you've published your Tree with the automatically generated Gramps IDs or Custom IDs.) 

When you compare/merge those Revised trees, having the same ID means a new item won't be added to your Place tree. It might save you from having to merge duplicate places with different IDs.

Likewise, if you import data from other people (or files) already using a GeoNames standard ID, the databases is less likely to add duplicates if you're already using the the same standard ID naming.

-Brian

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:16, Richard Troxel
I have just discovered this Gramplet and can definitely see its usefulness. I do have a question about certain options that it presents.

In the WIKI it says,
ID field. This field displays the Gramps ID. It cannot be edited. There is a small Orig checkbox just above this field, if checked, the Original ID from the place is used instead of the found ID. Note that this checkbox is disabled if there is no original ID.
What are the pros and cons of using the GEO Id vs the original Gramps Id? What do you do?
--
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: Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

prculley
Regarding IDs; there is a definite advantage to using the GEO IDs; if they are used the tool can much more easily find places when it comes time to enclose a place.  It would reduce your work a bit.

It is not necessary to change the Gramps ID settings; they will still be used if you manually (or on import) create a new place.  The Place Cleanup tool will replace them with GEO IDs when you accept the values from the tool.  Gramps doesn't care if you have a mix.  And the 5.1.x Reorder ID tool is smart enough to NOT renumber the GEO IDs unless you specifically want it to.

As always it is usually a good idea to make a backup or at least a copy of your tree (by using a backup) for experimentation.  You might not like how the tool works, or might determine that some alternate settings of languages or something would suit your purposes better.

Paul C.

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:59 PM Richard Troxel <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks Brian!
I have not shared my database as of this time. The few "draft" reports that I have distributed (published) do not include any Gramps Id's, so these are not really considerations.

If I use the GEO Id's, should I change my Gramps ID Format settings? Does it hurt to have a mixture of Id's? I have already manually set up a number of enclosures. Part of me says that it would be less trouble to keep the Gramps Id's but I don't know if there is an advantage to the GEO Id's. Does that make sense?

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 10:42 AM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users <[hidden email]> wrote:
For others not familiar with the gramplet:
This option is in the section labeled  "Result/Edit view". This view appears after pressing Find button, showing of 10 rows of results.

Using the Original Gramps ID is strategic if you have copies of your tree out with other people doing edits. (Or perhaps you've published your Tree with the automatically generated Gramps IDs or Custom IDs.) 

When you compare/merge those Revised trees, having the same ID means a new item won't be added to your Place tree. It might save you from having to merge duplicate places with different IDs.

Likewise, if you import data from other people (or files) already using a GeoNames standard ID, the databases is less likely to add duplicates if you're already using the the same standard ID naming.

-Brian

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:16, Richard Troxel
I have just discovered this Gramplet and can definitely see its usefulness. I do have a question about certain options that it presents.

In the WIKI it says,
ID field. This field displays the Gramps ID. It cannot be edited. There is a small Orig checkbox just above this field, if checked, the Original ID from the place is used instead of the found ID. Note that this checkbox is disabled if there is no original ID.
What are the pros and cons of using the GEO Id vs the original Gramps Id? What do you do?
--
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: Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

Richard Troxel
Thanks Paul! I think that about covers my questions for now.

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:47 AM Paul Culley <[hidden email]> wrote:
Regarding IDs; there is a definite advantage to using the GEO IDs; if they are used the tool can much more easily find places when it comes time to enclose a place.  It would reduce your work a bit.

It is not necessary to change the Gramps ID settings; they will still be used if you manually (or on import) create a new place.  The Place Cleanup tool will replace them with GEO IDs when you accept the values from the tool.  Gramps doesn't care if you have a mix.  And the 5.1.x Reorder ID tool is smart enough to NOT renumber the GEO IDs unless you specifically want it to.

As always it is usually a good idea to make a backup or at least a copy of your tree (by using a backup) for experimentation.  You might not like how the tool works, or might determine that some alternate settings of languages or something would suit your purposes better.

Paul C.

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:59 PM Richard Troxel <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thanks Brian!
I have not shared my database as of this time. The few "draft" reports that I have distributed (published) do not include any Gramps Id's, so these are not really considerations.

If I use the GEO Id's, should I change my Gramps ID Format settings? Does it hurt to have a mixture of Id's? I have already manually set up a number of enclosures. Part of me says that it would be less trouble to keep the Gramps Id's but I don't know if there is an advantage to the GEO Id's. Does that make sense?

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 10:42 AM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users <[hidden email]> wrote:
For others not familiar with the gramplet:
This option is in the section labeled  "Result/Edit view". This view appears after pressing Find button, showing of 10 rows of results.

Using the Original Gramps ID is strategic if you have copies of your tree out with other people doing edits. (Or perhaps you've published your Tree with the automatically generated Gramps IDs or Custom IDs.) 

When you compare/merge those Revised trees, having the same ID means a new item won't be added to your Place tree. It might save you from having to merge duplicate places with different IDs.

Likewise, if you import data from other people (or files) already using a GeoNames standard ID, the databases is less likely to add duplicates if you're already using the the same standard ID naming.

-Brian

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:16, Richard Troxel
I have just discovered this Gramplet and can definitely see its usefulness. I do have a question about certain options that it presents.

In the WIKI it says,
ID field. This field displays the Gramps ID. It cannot be edited. There is a small Orig checkbox just above this field, if checked, the Original ID from the place is used instead of the found ID. Note that this checkbox is disabled if there is no original ID.
What are the pros and cons of using the GEO Id vs the original Gramps Id? What do you do?
--
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: Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

GRAMPS - User mailing list
In reply to this post by Richard Troxel
My wild guess is that the Places enhancement in the next release may have support aliased IDs for multiple (parallel) geographical data schemes. This may be necessary for data harmonization compatibility. 

Say that you want to store the compatible IDs for GeoNames, ISO 3166, & UN/LOCODE sytems while also maintaining Gramps more limited IDs. And there is no doubt that these systems will evolve and change with time.  (Like the GPS coordinates have changed over time as mapping systems changed and with plate tectonic based continental drift.) If you have the ability to store all those IDs (in addition to the Gramps ID), then you will be able to move seamlessly between systems & take advantage of the disparity of features.

Internally, Gramps doesn't care since the IDs shown to Users are just a lookup handles to the internal pointers. 

That said, the ID in Gramps IS important to Filter rules because they use the ID rather than the internal pointer handle. But it isn't important for linked records in your Notes because those invisibly use the handle. Thus re-numbering IDs will break filter rules but not linked Notes. 

(I recently re-numbered my records because I'd outstripped the leading zeroes in the ID auto-generator and sorting Persons or Events by ID no longer approximated the age of the record.  That re-numbering appears to have broken my bookmarks and a few other items that appear to have also unexpectedly used IDs instead of pointers. Still isolating what was affected.)

The use of alias IDs makes sense elsewhere too. Just like I'll want to store the ID for FamilySearch, Ancestry, WikiTree & FindAGrave alongside of their Gramps Person ID. A person might have multiple IDs (for unmerged duplicates) in those systems. Or one system might contain expanded data the others don't and need to be periodically data-scraped.

I seem to have wandered off-topic but the point is... re-defining IDs is a prime example of the laws of unexpected consequences. It isn't a question of whether there be breakage, but rather, what will be broken.

-Brian

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:57, Richard Troxel
Thanks Brian!
I have not shared my database as of this time. The few "draft" reports that I have distributed (published) do not include any Gramps Id's, so these are not really considerations.

If I use the GEO Id's, should I change my Gramps ID Format settings? Does it hurt to have a mixture of Id's? I have already manually set up a number of enclosures. Part of me says that it would be less trouble to keep the Gramps Id's but I don't know if there is an advantage to the GEO Id's. Does that make sense?

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 10:42 AM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users <[hidden email]> wrote:
For others not familiar with the gramplet:
This option is in the section labeled  "Result/Edit view". This view appears after pressing Find button, showing of 10 rows of results.

Using the Original Gramps ID is strategic if you have copies of your tree out with other people doing edits. (Or perhaps you've published your Tree with the automatically generated Gramps IDs or Custom IDs.) 

When you compare/merge those Revised trees, having the same ID means a new item won't be added to your Place tree. It might save you from having to merge duplicate places with different IDs.

Likewise, if you import data from other people (or files) already using a GeoNames standard ID, the databases is less likely to add duplicates if you're already using the the same standard ID naming.

-Brian

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:16, Richard Troxel
I have just discovered this Gramplet and can definitely see its usefulness. I do have a question about certain options that it presents.

In the WIKI it says,
ID field. This field displays the Gramps ID. It cannot be edited. There is a small Orig checkbox just above this field, if checked, the Original ID from the place is used instead of the found ID. Note that this checkbox is disabled if there is no original ID.
What are the pros and cons of using the GEO Id vs the original Gramps Id? What do you do?
--
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: Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

Richard Troxel
Interesting. 

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:59 AM [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
My wild guess is that the Places enhancement in the next release may have support aliased IDs for multiple (parallel) geographical data schemes. This may be necessary for data harmonization compatibility. 

Say that you want to store the compatible IDs for GeoNames, ISO 3166, & UN/LOCODE sytems while also maintaining Gramps more limited IDs. And there is no doubt that these systems will evolve and change with time.  (Like the GPS coordinates have changed over time as mapping systems changed and with plate tectonic based continental drift.) If you have the ability to store all those IDs (in addition to the Gramps ID), then you will be able to move seamlessly between systems & take advantage of the disparity of features.

Internally, Gramps doesn't care since the IDs shown to Users are just a lookup handles to the internal pointers. 

That said, the ID in Gramps IS important to Filter rules because they use the ID rather than the internal pointer handle. But it isn't important for linked records in your Notes because those invisibly use the handle. Thus re-numbering IDs will break filter rules but not linked Notes. 

(I recently re-numbered my records because I'd outstripped the leading zeroes in the ID auto-generator and sorting Persons or Events by ID no longer approximated the age of the record.  That re-numbering appears to have broken my bookmarks and a few other items that appear to have also unexpectedly used IDs instead of pointers. Still isolating what was affected.)

The use of alias IDs makes sense elsewhere too. Just like I'll want to store the ID for FamilySearch, Ancestry, WikiTree & FindAGrave alongside of their Gramps Person ID. A person might have multiple IDs (for unmerged duplicates) in those systems. Or one system might contain expanded data the others don't and need to be periodically data-scraped.

I seem to have wandered off-topic but the point is... re-defining IDs is a prime example of the laws of unexpected consequences. It isn't a question of whether there be breakage, but rather, what will be broken.

-Brian

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:57, Richard Troxel
Thanks Brian!
I have not shared my database as of this time. The few "draft" reports that I have distributed (published) do not include any Gramps Id's, so these are not really considerations.

If I use the GEO Id's, should I change my Gramps ID Format settings? Does it hurt to have a mixture of Id's? I have already manually set up a number of enclosures. Part of me says that it would be less trouble to keep the Gramps Id's but I don't know if there is an advantage to the GEO Id's. Does that make sense?

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 10:42 AM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users <[hidden email]> wrote:
For others not familiar with the gramplet:
This option is in the section labeled  "Result/Edit view". This view appears after pressing Find button, showing of 10 rows of results.

Using the Original Gramps ID is strategic if you have copies of your tree out with other people doing edits. (Or perhaps you've published your Tree with the automatically generated Gramps IDs or Custom IDs.) 

When you compare/merge those Revised trees, having the same ID means a new item won't be added to your Place tree. It might save you from having to merge duplicate places with different IDs.

Likewise, if you import data from other people (or files) already using a GeoNames standard ID, the databases is less likely to add duplicates if you're already using the the same standard ID naming.

-Brian

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:16, Richard Troxel
I have just discovered this Gramplet and can definitely see its usefulness. I do have a question about certain options that it presents.

In the WIKI it says,
ID field. This field displays the Gramps ID. It cannot be edited. There is a small Orig checkbox just above this field, if checked, the Original ID from the place is used instead of the found ID. Note that this checkbox is disabled if there is no original ID.
What are the pros and cons of using the GEO Id vs the original Gramps Id? What do you do?
--
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