Possible place enhancements for v5.1

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
56 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

rider

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

Rich Lakey

I agree, I feel overwhelmed sometimes.

Example: I have several hundred census records in gramps added with Form. But last night not having done one for 3 or 4 months I found it took me over an hour to add a census record for a large family. Since I already have the census image in the gallery of the involved parties I wonder if its worth the effort to put the entries also in the attributes where no one sees them. Do I really need sources and citations when I have the actual census image?

Rich

On 2/11/19 3:42 PM, Lynda wrote:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

StoltHD
In reply to this post by rider
Lynda,
Its great that you dont need it, doesn't mean noone else don't need it.

Some of us really what to research the history in a proper way, not following a artificial path that has been controlled by the LDS for half a century.
To be able to do real Event based research or to be able to do real place/location research, will be of great value for many researchers, even though you can't see the benefits of it...

  Lineage-linked research actually alter the history, it doesnt register it correct. !

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 22:43 skrev Lynda <[hidden email]>:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda
_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

Ron Johnson
In reply to this post by Rich Lakey
On 2/11/19 4:00 PM, Rich Lakey wrote:

I agree, I feel overwhelmed sometimes.

Example: I have several hundred census records in gramps added with Form. But last night not having done one for 3 or 4 months I found it took me over an hour to add a census record for a large family.


That's why I don't use forms... :)

Since I already have the census image in the gallery of the involved parties I wonder if its worth the effort to put the entries also in the attributes where no one sees them. Do I really need sources and citations when I have the actual census image?


You don't need citations, and can attach images to Events and add text as notes if you:

1. are a genealogical island unto yourself, never sending or receiving genealogical reports to or from other researchers,
2. who only builds your tree(s) using online sources that have downloadable images.

Neither of those are very likely.

On a more practical level, notes are embedded in detailed reports, and shared notes are repeated for each person the Event is associated with.  That means lots and lots of duplication in your detailed reports.

OTOH, citations are endnoted, so there's only one copy at the end of the report.

Thus, citations are a Good Thing.

Rich

On 2/11/19 3:42 PM, Lynda wrote:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.



--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

Ron Johnson
In reply to this post by StoltHD

Then use a lineage-linked genealogy program.  Don't force Gramps to morph into something it's not.

For example, Python use to be a great and simple language, and then the Computer Science elitists got hold of it, shoehorning in all sorts of "cutting edge" crap in it.  Now it's bloated and complicated.  Don't do the same to Gramps!!!!


On 2/11/19 4:25 PM, StoltHD wrote:
Lynda,
Its great that you dont need it, doesn't mean noone else don't need it.

Some of us really what to research the history in a proper way, not following a artificial path that has been controlled by the LDS for half a century.
To be able to do real Event based research or to be able to do real place/location research, will be of great value for many researchers, even though you can't see the benefits of it...

  Lineage-linked research actually alter the history, it doesnt register it correct. !

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 22:43 skrev Lynda <[hidden email]>:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda
_______________________________________________
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


--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

Ron Johnson
In reply to this post by StoltHD

Correct version: Then use an Event-based genealogy program instead of Gramps.  Don't force Gramps to morph into something it's not.

On 2/11/19 4:25 PM, StoltHD wrote:
Lynda,
Its great that you dont need it, doesn't mean noone else don't need it.

Some of us really what to research the history in a proper way, not following a artificial path that has been controlled by the LDS for half a century.
To be able to do real Event based research or to be able to do real place/location research, will be of great value for many researchers, even though you can't see the benefits of it...

  Lineage-linked research actually alter the history, it doesnt register it correct. !

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 22:43 skrev Lynda <[hidden email]>:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda


--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

StoltHD
Ron,
There are no real Event based software out there, and much of the reason might be narrowed headed researchers that don't care much about how history get altered to a fault by lineage-linked research.

Why doing research the wrong way and make errors, when it can be so simple to do it the right way the first time.

Why shall people like you always go against wishes from people that want to make a software (this time Gramps) to a even better product, that more serious users can use to a wider specter of research?

This has nothing to do with bloating a software, it's about making a great software even greater with more real usefull features. Even if you don't seem to see the usage of this features, there might be younger people that actually wants to register historical events more accurate thant whats been the norm in the genealogical society, it is actually a good thing to change the way of doing things, when the changes is to the better...

And you and everybody else that think that lineage-linked are the "only way", you can still use the simple way of doing things, even if Gramps get more features that allow for a more correct way of register history.

It might be time to evolve, its 2019, not 1952... 

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 23:47 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:

Correct version: Then use an Event-based genealogy program instead of Gramps.  Don't force Gramps to morph into something it's not.

On 2/11/19 4:25 PM, StoltHD wrote:
Lynda,
Its great that you dont need it, doesn't mean noone else don't need it.

Some of us really what to research the history in a proper way, not following a artificial path that has been controlled by the LDS for half a century.
To be able to do real Event based research or to be able to do real place/location research, will be of great value for many researchers, even though you can't see the benefits of it...

  Lineage-linked research actually alter the history, it doesnt register it correct. !

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 22:43 skrev Lynda <[hidden email]>:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda


--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

Ron Johnson
On 2/12/19 6:57 AM, StoltHD wrote:
Ron,
There are no real Event based software out there, and much of the reason might be narrowed headed researchers that don't care much about how history get altered to a fault by lineage-linked research.

I'm an amateur genealogist, not an historian.

Why doing research the wrong way and make errors, when it can be so simple to do it the right way the first time.

Inertia.  Lots and lots of inertia.

Why shall people like you always go against wishes from people that want to make a software (this time Gramps) to a even better product, that more serious users can use to a wider specter of research?

You're more than welcome to fork Gramps and turn it into whatever you want of it.

This has nothing to do with bloating a software,

We'll see about that.

it's about making a great software even greater with more real usefull features.

That's the definition of software bloat.

Even if you don't seem to see the usage of this features, there might be younger people that actually wants to register historical events more accurate thant whats been the norm in the genealogical society,

Explain -- oh wise one -- how I'm not accurately recording events?

it is actually a good thing to change the way of doing things, when the changes is to the better...

And you and everybody else that think that lineage-linked are the "only way", you can still use the simple way of doing things,

If Event-based genealogy is so different from lineage-linked genealogy then Gramps would morph from software that does one thing (lineage-linking) very well, to something which does two things in a very confused manner.

If new users are confused now by Gramps, it doesn't take much imagination to realize that it would become impenetrable.

even if Gramps get more features that allow for a more correct way of register history.

That's not how software works.  Adding more and more and more features and capabilities always muddles up the user interface and confuses the users.

It might be time to evolve, its 2019, not 1952...

And the current way might be Good Enough for all us amateurs.


Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 23:47 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:

Correct version: Then use an Event-based genealogy program instead of Gramps.  Don't force Gramps to morph into something it's not.

On 2/11/19 4:25 PM, StoltHD wrote:
Lynda,
Its great that you dont need it, doesn't mean noone else don't need it.

Some of us really what to research the history in a proper way, not following a artificial path that has been controlled by the LDS for half a century.
To be able to do real Event based research or to be able to do real place/location research, will be of great value for many researchers, even though you can't see the benefits of it...

  Lineage-linked research actually alter the history, it doesnt register it correct. !

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 22:43 skrev Lynda <[hidden email]>:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda


--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1 item 6

drjimbouk
In reply to this post by Nick Hall
How will this differ from the current list of events associated with place
and listed under >Quickview>Place events?



--
Sent from: http://gramps.1791082.n4.nabble.com/GRAMPS-User-f1807095.html


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

GRAMPS - User mailing list
In reply to this post by StoltHD
Civility, please.  Please don't attack the person or mindset. Identifying weaknesses that could be exploited is encouraged though. Attack those as hard as you like. We need to shore them up!

Discussion of opposing viewpoints is a good method for finding the best (or best for now) opportunities.

The Philosophical approach is to posit a dilemma and let others propose an answer, then adopt an opposing stance and have the responder defend their proposition. 

One of the nice things about Gramps is the Gramplet framework. Ideas like these can be explored first as a gramplet... where revisions can be released fast & furious. Users can choose not to install it (Retail). 

If our Architect determines that it is widely useful, they can integrate the feature (Wholesale). When integration is proposed, that's an appropriate time to bring up scope creep & software bloat. But you have trust our Architects... they've brought us this far.



On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 6:59, StoltHD
_______________________________________________
Ron, 
There are no real Event based software out there, and much of the reason might be narrowed headed researchers that don't care much about how history get altered to a fault by lineage-linked research.

Why doing research the wrong way and make errors, when it can be so simple to do it the right way the first time.

Why shall people like you always go against wishes from people that want to make a software (this time Gramps) to a even better product, that more serious users can use to a wider specter of research?

This has nothing to do with bloating a software, it's about making a great software even greater with more real usefull features. Even if you don't seem to see the usage of this features, there might be younger people that actually wants to register historical events more accurate thant whats been the norm in the genealogical society, it is actually a good thing to change the way of doing things, when the changes is to the better...

And you and everybody else that think that lineage-linked are the "only way", you can still use the simple way of doing things, even if Gramps get more features that allow for a more correct way of register history.

It might be time to evolve, its 2019, not 1952... 

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 23:47 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:

Correct version: Then use an Event-basedgenealogy program instead of Gramps.  Don't force Gramps to morph into something it's not.

On 2/11/19 4:25 PM, StoltHD wrote:
Lynda,
Its great that you dont need it, doesn't mean noone else don't need it.

Some of us really what to research the history in a proper way, not following a artificial path that has been controlled by the LDS for half a century.
To be able to do real Event based research or to be able to do real place/location research, will be of great value for many researchers, even though you can't see the benefits of it...

  Lineage-linked research actually alter the history, it doesnt register it correct. !

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 22:43 skrev Lynda <[hidden email]>:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda


-- 
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

Peter Merchant
In reply to this post by StoltHD
On 12/02/2019 12:57, StoltHD wrote:
>
> Why do research the wrong way and make errors, when it can be so simple to do it the right way the first time.

Jaran, as a simple researcher who appreciates the features of gramps and the effort a lot of people put into it, I use it as it is because this is the way that other programs work too.  I am still trying to get to grips with using some of the other features, like places changing name throughout history etc.

If there is another way as you suggest, can you point me to a description of it please? I am always willing to learn.

Much appreciated,

Peter M.


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

Nick Hall
In reply to this post by Nick Hall
Thanks for your feedback.

Sixteen people gave opinions on the options I listed.   The most
requested features were time-dependent place types and place hierarchy
types.  I think we should implement these.

I also think we should add abbreviations to place names and citations to
place names, place types and "enclosed by" links. Some people indicated
that they will find them useful, and these features can be added in a
neat and consistent manner with the rest of Gramps.

That leaves us with attributes and events.  One alternative suggestion
was to use time-dependent attributes.  We could either add a date field
to all existing attributes or just create a new attribute object for
places.  It would be interesting to examine some use cases for
time-dependent attributes.  I'm not sure that they have any advantage
over events or event attributes.

I can understand concerns over place events.  Allowing places to be the
subject of an event is a new concept in Gramps.  It is a powerful
concept, but could be confusing for users.  It would also be possible to
create a circular reference (Place -> Event -> Place) which we try to
avoid.  The only existing example I can think of at the moment is (Media
-> Citation -> Media).

May I remind users that in v5.0 it is possible to define your own place
name formats, and specify them to be used when generating reports.  The
addition of abbreviations will allow for more compact formats.  It is
already possible to specify the levels used.  For example, for some
reports you may not need the place name to be displayed with any more
details than the populated place level.

There were also requests to improve the existing place user interface. 
We are always looking for new ideas and for people with good UI design
skills.  We are aware that the place editor and place selector could be
improved.  There is also a feature request for an easier way to add new
places.  Please let us know if you would like to contribute a better design.

Finally, there were a couple of extra points raised:

1. Better integration with the GOV database.

We are moving in this direction.  Storing the GOV ID and UUID without
using the existing Gramps ID field will be discussed separately.

2. Support for bounding boxes and polygons.

Adding a field to store a bounding box or zoom level is worth
consideration.  However, we are not attempting to be a GIS application. 
Where would we obtain the polygon data?  Would it actually be useful?

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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

StoltHD
Both Google and OSM have some support for polygon data, as has multiple others, but the problem will be if the are inter-operative between the different services...
GOV is a good service, but for many places there are no usable data... and for many places there are only German names and the information on the places are written in German... something that might become a bigger problem for users than having a feature of adding Events or not to a place/location?

I think all of the suggestions made in your first mail was really good additions to a Great Software, without in any form "bloating" it, but since I'm clearly not a member of the "Inner Gramps Clan", my opinion doesnt count, and it seems that I must fork my own version of Gramps or find a new software to use... and since i'm not a developer, there seems to be just one option... 

jaran


Den tir. 12. feb. 2019 kl. 22:19 skrev Nick Hall <[hidden email]>:
Thanks for your feedback.

Sixteen people gave opinions on the options I listed.   The most
requested features were time-dependent place types and place hierarchy
types.  I think we should implement these.

I also think we should add abbreviations to place names and citations to
place names, place types and "enclosed by" links. Some people indicated
that they will find them useful, and these features can be added in a
neat and consistent manner with the rest of Gramps.

That leaves us with attributes and events.  One alternative suggestion
was to use time-dependent attributes.  We could either add a date field
to all existing attributes or just create a new attribute object for
places.  It would be interesting to examine some use cases for
time-dependent attributes.  I'm not sure that they have any advantage
over events or event attributes.

I can understand concerns over place events.  Allowing places to be the
subject of an event is a new concept in Gramps.  It is a powerful
concept, but could be confusing for users.  It would also be possible to
create a circular reference (Place -> Event -> Place) which we try to
avoid.  The only existing example I can think of at the moment is (Media
-> Citation -> Media).

May I remind users that in v5.0 it is possible to define your own place
name formats, and specify them to be used when generating reports.  The
addition of abbreviations will allow for more compact formats.  It is
already possible to specify the levels used.  For example, for some
reports you may not need the place name to be displayed with any more
details than the populated place level.

There were also requests to improve the existing place user interface. 
We are always looking for new ideas and for people with good UI design
skills.  We are aware that the place editor and place selector could be
improved.  There is also a feature request for an easier way to add new
places.  Please let us know if you would like to contribute a better design.

Finally, there were a couple of extra points raised:

1. Better integration with the GOV database.

We are moving in this direction.  Storing the GOV ID and UUID without
using the existing Gramps ID field will be discussed separately.

2. Support for bounding boxes and polygons.

Adding a field to store a bounding box or zoom level is worth
consideration.  However, we are not attempting to be a GIS application. 
Where would we obtain the polygon data?  Would it actually be useful?

Regards,


Nick.




_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

Ron Johnson
In reply to this post by Nick Hall
On 2/12/19 3:17 PM, Nick Hall wrote:

> Thanks for your feedback.
>
> Sixteen people gave opinions on the options I listed.   The most requested
> features were time-dependent place types and place hierarchy types.  I
> think we should implement these.
>
> I also think we should add abbreviations to place names and citations to
> place names, place types and "enclosed by" links. Some people indicated
> that they will find them useful, and these features can be added in a neat
> and consistent manner with the rest of Gramps.

Abbreviations would be stunningly useful.  Currently, I hack around it using
"Replace Display Format", but would rather have this.

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.


_______________________________________________
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
|

Tip: Place Abbreviation workaround

GRAMPS - User mailing list
Thought I'd share a place selection workaround that's proven useful.

Since most of the places entered are for family their events occurring around places where I've also lived, I find myself drilling down the the same part of the (grouped) Place list over & over & over. 

Unfortunately, the names of my hometown, county, and township are neither unique nor 1st among equals.  So I can't use the interactive search & it takes too long to choose the right one from a list of duplicate names. (For more about the interactive search feature, see Fig. 8.4 in https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Gramps_5.0_Wiki_Manual_-_Navigation#Finding_records )  

On the other hand, their American Postal Codes (called ZIP Codes) are unique & well remembered.  You could use the standard Abbreviations since they may be as memorable for you.

So I added post-dated (after 3000AD) ZIP code Alternate Name entries for those 3 cities in the US.

Now I can type in those ZIP codes in the Name Contains search field and the Primary name of the Place appears in the selector. ----- and ZIP codes are QUICK because I can 10-key it on a numeric keypad.

If the place is just in the same county, I can still use my ZIPs. A version 5 tweak to the Place selector interface lets us Drill up or Drill Down after searching by selecting (click, don't double-click) a found Place, click the Clear button. The unfiltered list will re-appear --- centered and groupings expanded to show the selected Place.

Ordinarily, I would use a temporary Tag for for amalgamating a temporary list of family haunts. (Create a Custom Filter that isolates the extended extended immediate family, then a second Filter that finds all Places associated with Events for that family & Tag those Places. The Tagged list is a 'Shortlist' of Places most likely to be used for new Events in this Family.)

And the online manual section suggests the Country or Postal Code belong in the Code field when creating or editting Places. 
When I started with Gramps, I decided to put US states Abbreviations in the Code field. (like Pennsylvania is US-PA) But I haven't discovered the added value which might justify that effort.

Unfortunately, neither the Code field nor the Tag field can be searched during Place selection. And only searchable fields are helpful for streamlining repetitive data entry.

You COULD expand on the concept to build workaround hierarchies.  Like a series of Place With post-dated categories as Alternate Names. (Like the 20 townships spanning 3 counties across 2 states that we called the Tri-CountyArea.) But much of the regional 'drilling' exploration functionally goes away each time you Clear the search.

Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? (The one about a psychiatrist appointment has already been noted.)

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 15:45, Ron Johnson
>
> I also think we should add abbreviations to place names and citations to
> place names, place types and "enclosed by" links. Some people indicated
> that they will find them useful, and these features can be added in a neat
> and consistent manner with the rest of Gramps.

Abbreviations would be stunningly useful.  Currently, I hack around it using "Replace Display Format", but would rather have this.


_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

StoltHD
In reply to this post by Ron Johnson

Ron,

Bloating a software is not when useful features is added to it, but when  features/functions that is not useful are added, like when Legacy Familytree add a "Bingo Report" instead of fixing the way it handles names.

The developers of Gramps are not going to remove anything even though they may add new feature that some see useful, so you don't need to be afraid that you need to change the way of doing things... and if you don't like new features, noone stop you from staying on version 3, 4 or 5.0, or as you told me, make your own fork, that do not allow for any new features at all.

And remember that there are more people researching there families than you, some of them wants to have the option to add more information, than you, and they might like Gramps, not all of them are developers... So why can't you take of your blinders rather than the rest of us adapt to your way of doing things?
I know about many Norwegians that will start using Gramps the moment Gramps add Events on Places and Dated attributes on Places. But they don't see why they should learn the advanced way of doing things in Gramps as long as it doesn't have any advantages or features that commercial software like Legacy and Rootsmagic don't have... 

And hopefully, you do understand that even though a software like Gramps evolves and get more advanced features, it doesn't stop you from doing things the way you always have done things, it just let other people do more... and even a lot of amateurs like to register more details and structured information... and be able to add citations to the information, even if you don't see the point of doing it...

Event based is not that different but it is an important difference, and it can without problems be added features that allow for this in Gramps, without alter the lineage-linked way of doing it...
The most important difference is that most Events are not Person Centered, they are Place/Location Centered, most Events would have occurred even if your Research Object (Person or Family) wasn't present on the place at the given time.

And the evolvement and developement of a software cant stop, just because a few users think the Current Way is Good Enough, then the software will loose the users, and it will die, even Really Good FOSS software will die if it doesn't evolve,

Jaran
......................................................

Den tir. 12. feb. 2019 kl. 16:00 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:
On 2/12/19 6:57 AM, StoltHD wrote:
Ron,
There are no real Event based software out there, and much of the reason might be narrowed headed researchers that don't care much about how history get altered to a fault by lineage-linked research.

I'm an amateur genealogist, not an historian.

Why doing research the wrong way and make errors, when it can be so simple to do it the right way the first time.

Inertia.  Lots and lots of inertia.

Why shall people like you always go against wishes from people that want to make a software (this time Gramps) to a even better product, that more serious users can use to a wider specter of research?

You're more than welcome to fork Gramps and turn it into whatever you want of it.

This has nothing to do with bloating a software,

We'll see about that.

it's about making a great software even greater with more real usefull features.

That's the definition of software bloat.

Even if you don't seem to see the usage of this features, there might be younger people that actually wants to register historical events more accurate thant whats been the norm in the genealogical society,

Explain -- oh wise one -- how I'm not accurately recording events?

it is actually a good thing to change the way of doing things, when the changes is to the better...

And you and everybody else that think that lineage-linked are the "only way", you can still use the simple way of doing things,

If Event-based genealogy is so different from lineage-linked genealogy then Gramps would morph from software that does one thing (lineage-linking) very well, to something which does two things in a very confused manner.

If new users are confused now by Gramps, it doesn't take much imagination to realize that it would become impenetrable.

even if Gramps get more features that allow for a more correct way of register history.

That's not how software works.  Adding more and more and more features and capabilities always muddles up the user interface and confuses the users.

It might be time to evolve, its 2019, not 1952...

And the current way might be Good Enough for all us amateurs.


Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 23:47 skrev Ron Johnson <[hidden email]>:

Correct version: Then use an Event-based genealogy program instead of Gramps.  Don't force Gramps to morph into something it's not.

On 2/11/19 4:25 PM, StoltHD wrote:
Lynda,
Its great that you dont need it, doesn't mean noone else don't need it.

Some of us really what to research the history in a proper way, not following a artificial path that has been controlled by the LDS for half a century.
To be able to do real Event based research or to be able to do real place/location research, will be of great value for many researchers, even though you can't see the benefits of it...

  Lineage-linked research actually alter the history, it doesnt register it correct. !

Jaran

Den man. 11. feb. 2019 kl. 22:43 skrev Lynda <[hidden email]>:

   1. Possible place enhancements for v5.1 (Nick Hall)
   
From wikipedia.org:
Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members.

It seems to me that these proposed changes would make use of the above definition with the terms "family/families" changed to "geography/geographical".  Is Gramps not already sufficient for that?  Rename "Person" category to "Place/Subject" category and one can knock oneself out with events, media, citations, sources, attributes, hierarchies, etc.

On a less satirical note, I already have a system to address these situations that works for me, but #2 would be good.  I see no problem with any of the suggestions as long as there is someone who wants to code, debug, maintain the changes AND the added place complexity does not interfere with the work-flow of those who prefer to concentrate on family history on a more basic level.

I have had zero success over the past couple years trying to introduce even some experienced researchers to Gramps because they think it is too complicated.  I don't want to see Gramps become so bloated with specification that it only serves a small group of users and/or becomes so much of a headache that the developers are too overwhelmed to maintain it.

Lynda


--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
_______________________________________________
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: Possible place enhancements for v5.1

StoltHD
In reply to this post by Nick Hall
"
I can understand concerns over place events.  Allowing places to be the 
subject of an event is a new concept in Gramps.  It is a powerful 
concept, but could be confusing for users.  It would also be possible to 
create a circular reference (Place -> Event -> Place) which we try to 
avoid.  The only existing example I can think of at the moment is (Media 
-> Citation -> Media). " 


People that don't want to use Events on Places can just use the lineage-linked way of doing things, its not like you are going to remove whats already in Gramps... and the addition of Events and Attributes doesn't alter the Place Editor in any other ways than that it add the two features to the Editor...
It will not making the Editors more difficult to understand, it want make it more "bloated", it only add the possibility for people to do more if they want to, without creating some cumberstone workarounds., that often can't be reflected in a report...

The Circular reference would be easy to make a warning for, just make a routine that checks the Place Field of the Event, and if that is not NULL, create a Warning telling the user to check it, or just plain out grey it out if the Event is added to a place,

I really believe it is some differences between Dated Attributes and Events, but of the two I can utilize Events (for places) better than dated attributes, because I also can add People or Families as participants to the Events... And if its not added citations to the Attributes, the Events will be the preferred way, because of the citations... but at the same time, there are things that fit better as a Dated Attribute than an Event, like i.e. the size of a farm or house, how many buildings on a property, the type of a ship, the color of a house, the amount of people leaving in on a farm or in a house at a given time (it might not be census information that can be added to the census event), what floor a family live on, the apartment number...

And the GOV data, could be added as dated attributes to a place, much better than making specific fields for that kind of data, Geographical boundaries of a Town, City, County and even Countries change over time, so insted of making a whole new time depending set for geodata, it could be added as Dated Attributes with specific names like:
Type: GOV DATA
Value: (something)
Date: From 1876-01-01 to 1923-12-31

Type: GOV DATA
Value: (Some other value)
Date: After 1923

Type: Google Map DATA
Value: (Some Value)
After: 1985

And if Gramps then only support GOV, it only search for the GOV TAG specified for use, if it support multiple services, it will search for the Attribute TAGS for that Service...
MAybe someone even make a Geotag converter that will be able to show all DATA on the same map services OSM, Google, Norske Kartverket or any other service that provides geodata and convert it to a visual point on a map..

Citation is some of the most important part when register data, unless you only do the research for yourself and it never will move of your computer, and it will be deleted when your time is up... Citations is the only way  other people can find out where you found something and continue the research instead of starting on scratch, doing the same job again...
We can see the problems it makes not creating citations to sources in places like Geni, Ancestry, MyHeritage and Familysearch, people uncritical add or alter individs as they "think" are right without linking or citing any sources, and the error multiply...

Jaran

Den tir. 12. feb. 2019 kl. 22:19 skrev Nick Hall <[hidden email]>:
Thanks for your feedback.

Sixteen people gave opinions on the options I listed.   The most
requested features were time-dependent place types and place hierarchy
types.  I think we should implement these.

I also think we should add abbreviations to place names and citations to
place names, place types and "enclosed by" links. Some people indicated
that they will find them useful, and these features can be added in a
neat and consistent manner with the rest of Gramps.

That leaves us with attributes and events.  One alternative suggestion
was to use time-dependent attributes.  We could either add a date field
to all existing attributes or just create a new attribute object for
places.  It would be interesting to examine some use cases for
time-dependent attributes.  I'm not sure that they have any advantage
over events or event attributes.

I can understand concerns over place events.  Allowing places to be the
subject of an event is a new concept in Gramps.  It is a powerful
concept, but could be confusing for users.  It would also be possible to
create a circular reference (Place -> Event -> Place) which we try to
avoid.  The only existing example I can think of at the moment is (Media
-> Citation -> Media).

May I remind users that in v5.0 it is possible to define your own place
name formats, and specify them to be used when generating reports.  The
addition of abbreviations will allow for more compact formats.  It is
already possible to specify the levels used.  For example, for some
reports you may not need the place name to be displayed with any more
details than the populated place level.

There were also requests to improve the existing place user interface. 
We are always looking for new ideas and for people with good UI design
skills.  We are aware that the place editor and place selector could be
improved.  There is also a feature request for an easier way to add new
places.  Please let us know if you would like to contribute a better design.

Finally, there were a couple of extra points raised:

1. Better integration with the GOV database.

We are moving in this direction.  Storing the GOV ID and UUID without
using the existing Gramps ID field will be discussed separately.

2. Support for bounding boxes and polygons.

Adding a field to store a bounding box or zoom level is worth
consideration.  However, we are not attempting to be a GIS application. 
Where would we obtain the polygon data?  Would it actually be useful?

Regards,


Nick.




_______________________________________________
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: Tip: Place Abbreviation workaround

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

This Got me thinking....

Why not incorporate the Zip/Postal code into a modified Gramps ID? The
ID is already searchable in the place selection list.

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:17 PM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Thought I'd share a place selection workaround that's proven useful.
>
> Since most of the places entered are for family their events occurring around places where I've also lived, I find myself drilling down the the same part of the (grouped) Place list over & over & over.
>
> Unfortunately, the names of my hometown, county, and township are neither unique nor 1st among equals.  So I can't use the interactive search & it takes too long to choose the right one from a list of duplicate names. (For more about the interactive search feature, see Fig. 8.4 in https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Gramps_5.0_Wiki_Manual_-_Navigation#Finding_records )
>
> On the other hand, their American Postal Codes (called ZIP Codes) are unique & well remembered.  You could use the standard Abbreviations since they may be as memorable for you.
>
> So I added post-dated (after 3000AD) ZIP code Alternate Name entries for those 3 cities in the US.
>
> Now I can type in those ZIP codes in the Name Contains search field and the Primary name of the Place appears in the selector. ----- and ZIP codes are QUICK because I can 10-key it on a numeric keypad.
>
> If the place is just in the same county, I can still use my ZIPs. A version 5 tweak to the Place selector interface lets us Drill up or Drill Down after searching by selecting (click, don't double-click) a found Place, click the Clear button. The unfiltered list will re-appear --- centered and groupings expanded to show the selected Place.
>
> Ordinarily, I would use a temporary Tag for for amalgamating a temporary list of family haunts. (Create a Custom Filter that isolates the extended extended immediate family, then a second Filter that finds all Places associated with Events for that family & Tag those Places. The Tagged list is a 'Shortlist' of Places most likely to be used for new Events in this Family.)
>
> And the online manual section suggests the Country or Postal Code belong in the Code field when creating or editting Places.
> https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Places_in_Gramps#Editing_Places
> When I started with Gramps, I decided to put US states Abbreviations in the Code field. (like Pennsylvania is US-PA) But I haven't discovered the added value which might justify that effort.
>
> Unfortunately, neither the Code field nor the Tag field can be searched during Place selection. And only searchable fields are helpful for streamlining repetitive data entry.
>
> You COULD expand on the concept to build workaround hierarchies.  Like a series of Place With post-dated categories as Alternate Names. (Like the 20 townships spanning 3 counties across 2 states that we called the Tri-CountyArea.) But much of the regional 'drilling' exploration functionally goes away each time you Clear the search.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? (The one about a psychiatrist appointment has already been noted.)
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 15:45, Ron Johnson
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I also think we should add abbreviations to place names and citations to
> > place names, place types and "enclosed by" links. Some people indicated
> > that they will find them useful, and these features can be added in a neat
> > and consistent manner with the rest of Gramps.
>
> Abbreviations would be stunningly useful.  Currently, I hack around it using "Replace Display Format", but would rather have this.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Tip: Place Abbreviation workaround

Ron Johnson


What about all the places that don't have postal codes?

On 2/13/19 10:36 AM, Dave Scheipers wrote:

> Hi Brian
>
> This Got me thinking....
>
> Why not incorporate the Zip/Postal code into a modified Gramps ID? The
> ID is already searchable in the place selection list.
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:17 PM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Thought I'd share a place selection workaround that's proven useful.
>>
>> Since most of the places entered are for family their events occurring around places where I've also lived, I find myself drilling down the the same part of the (grouped) Place list over & over & over.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the names of my hometown, county, and township are neither unique nor 1st among equals.  So I can't use the interactive search & it takes too long to choose the right one from a list of duplicate names. (For more about the interactive search feature, see Fig. 8.4 in https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Gramps_5.0_Wiki_Manual_-_Navigation#Finding_records )
>>
>> On the other hand, their American Postal Codes (called ZIP Codes) are unique & well remembered.  You could use the standard Abbreviations since they may be as memorable for you.
>>
>> So I added post-dated (after 3000AD) ZIP code Alternate Name entries for those 3 cities in the US.
>>
>> Now I can type in those ZIP codes in the Name Contains search field and the Primary name of the Place appears in the selector. ----- and ZIP codes are QUICK because I can 10-key it on a numeric keypad.
>>
>> If the place is just in the same county, I can still use my ZIPs. A version 5 tweak to the Place selector interface lets us Drill up or Drill Down after searching by selecting (click, don't double-click) a found Place, click the Clear button. The unfiltered list will re-appear --- centered and groupings expanded to show the selected Place.
>>
>> Ordinarily, I would use a temporary Tag for for amalgamating a temporary list of family haunts. (Create a Custom Filter that isolates the extended extended immediate family, then a second Filter that finds all Places associated with Events for that family & Tag those Places. The Tagged list is a 'Shortlist' of Places most likely to be used for new Events in this Family.)
>>
>> And the online manual section suggests the Country or Postal Code belong in the Code field when creating or editting Places.
>> https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Places_in_Gramps#Editing_Places
>> When I started with Gramps, I decided to put US states Abbreviations in the Code field. (like Pennsylvania is US-PA) But I haven't discovered the added value which might justify that effort.
>>
>> Unfortunately, neither the Code field nor the Tag field can be searched during Place selection. And only searchable fields are helpful for streamlining repetitive data entry.
>>
>> You COULD expand on the concept to build workaround hierarchies.  Like a series of Place With post-dated categories as Alternate Names. (Like the 20 townships spanning 3 counties across 2 states that we called the Tri-CountyArea.) But much of the regional 'drilling' exploration functionally goes away each time you Clear the search.
>>
>> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? (The one about a psychiatrist appointment has already been noted.)
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 15:45, Ron Johnson
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> I also think we should add abbreviations to place names and citations to
>>> place names, place types and "enclosed by" links. Some people indicated
>>> that they will find them useful, and these features can be added in a neat
>>> and consistent manner with the rest of Gramps.
>> Abbreviations would be stunningly useful.  Currently, I hack around it using "Replace Display Format", but would rather have this.

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.


_______________________________________________
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: Tip: Place Abbreviation workaround

GRAMPS - User mailing list



Hi All

Post (zip) codes only introduced in the UK between 1959 and 1974 (and
they are alpha numeric) so not a lot of use for family history unless
you are interested in living families also during that time they have
been updated, increased, revised so not a stable platform on which to
base anything really

Latitude and Longitude are longer term and yes I do understand a little
of the physical and geopolitical way these have been changed/manipulated
and not exactly easy to remember.

I have looked at GetGov a few times but it appears to be suffering the
Brexit effect not a lot of UK interest.

So I am keen to see if I can get the place hierarchy working with the
proposed enhancements

Regards
Phil
MLFHS 12583
Dumfries
On 13/02/2019 17:11, Ron Johnson wrote:

>
>
> What about all the places that don't have postal codes?
>
> On 2/13/19 10:36 AM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
>> Hi Brian
>>
>> This Got me thinking....
>>
>> Why not incorporate the Zip/Postal code into a modified Gramps ID? The
>> ID is already searchable in the place selection list.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:17 PM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Thought I'd share a place selection workaround that's proven useful.
>>>
>>> Since most of the places entered are for family their events
>>> occurring around places where I've also lived, I find myself drilling
>>> down the the same part of the (grouped) Place list over & over & over.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, the names of my hometown, county, and township are
>>> neither unique nor 1st among equals.  So I can't use the interactive
>>> search & it takes too long to choose the right one from a list of
>>> duplicate names. (For more about the interactive search feature, see
>>> Fig. 8.4 in
>>> https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Gramps_5.0_Wiki_Manual_-_Navigation#Finding_records 
>>> )
>>>
>>> On the other hand, their American Postal Codes (called ZIP Codes) are
>>> unique & well remembered.  You could use the standard Abbreviations
>>> since they may be as memorable for you.
>>>
>>> So I added post-dated (after 3000AD) ZIP code Alternate Name entries
>>> for those 3 cities in the US.
>>>
>>> Now I can type in those ZIP codes in the Name Contains search field
>>> and the Primary name of the Place appears in the selector. ----- and
>>> ZIP codes are QUICK because I can 10-key it on a numeric keypad.
>>>
>>> If the place is just in the same county, I can still use my ZIPs. A
>>> version 5 tweak to the Place selector interface lets us Drill up or
>>> Drill Down after searching by selecting (click, don't double-click) a
>>> found Place, click the Clear button. The unfiltered list will
>>> re-appear --- centered and groupings expanded to show the selected
>>> Place.
>>>
>>> Ordinarily, I would use a temporary Tag for for amalgamating a
>>> temporary list of family haunts. (Create a Custom Filter that
>>> isolates the extended extended immediate family, then a second Filter
>>> that finds all Places associated with Events for that family & Tag
>>> those Places. The Tagged list is a 'Shortlist' of Places most likely
>>> to be used for new Events in this Family.)
>>>
>>> And the online manual section suggests the Country or Postal Code
>>> belong in the Code field when creating or editting Places.
>>> https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Places_in_Gramps#Editing_Places 
>>>
>>> When I started with Gramps, I decided to put US states Abbreviations
>>> in the Code field. (like Pennsylvania is US-PA) But I haven't
>>> discovered the added value which might justify that effort.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, neither the Code field nor the Tag field can be
>>> searched during Place selection. And only searchable fields are
>>> helpful for streamlining repetitive data entry.
>>>
>>> You COULD expand on the concept to build workaround hierarchies.  
>>> Like a series of Place With post-dated categories as Alternate Names.
>>> (Like the 20 townships spanning 3 counties across 2 states that we
>>> called the Tri-CountyArea.) But much of the regional 'drilling'
>>> exploration functionally goes away each time you Clear the search.
>>>
>>> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? (The one about a psychiatrist
>>> appointment has already been noted.)
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 15:45, Ron Johnson
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> I also think we should add abbreviations to place names and
>>>> citations to
>>>> place names, place types and "enclosed by" links. Some people indicated
>>>> that they will find them useful, and these features can be added in
>>>> a neat
>>>> and consistent manner with the rest of Gramps.
>>> Abbreviations would be stunningly useful.  Currently, I hack around
>>> it using "Replace Display Format", but would rather have this.
>


_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
123