Religion - event or attribute?

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

Religion - event or attribute?

Eckhard Genßmann

Hi all,

 

I’m still not sure about the recommended way to capture “religion” in my database – should it be handled as event or as an attribute?

I’ve seen earlier discussions on the list, but I would like to better understand any side-effects.

 

The most of the about 2000 people in my database have never changed religion. The most are either catholic or evangelical (hope that’s the correct translation from German).

So far I’ve entered religion as event  (event-type is “religion” and I typed e.g. “evangelisch” into the description field).

In order to avoid multiple typing the same content, I once started to leverage those events amongst many people with the same religion.

 

However, by leveraging this data, it is no more longer really an “event” – and using attributes may be the better approach.

A combined approach may solve the issue: using attributes for all the people with “static” religion, and replace the attribute by multiple events (possibly with dates) for those people who converted.

But then we have other issues:

  1. it must be ensured, that information for an individual (attributes and events) should occur in reports on the same places (e.g. Navweb shows attributes far away from individual (events) information). That would request a change in Navweb an probably for many other reports as well
  2. What needs to be done to ensure that those “religion” attributes are handled correctly in gedcom exports?
  3. Are there any other areas that need more analysis regarding side effects?

 

I’m using GrampsAIO64-5.1.2-1 on Windows 10 pro (Version 1909)

 

I’m very interested in your thoughts about the topic,

Eckhard

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



--
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: Religion - event or attribute?

Chris Wood
I would have thought that without a doubt it has to be an event.

Religion, like politics or even profession, is an acquired, not inherent, characteristic. You aren't born with it, but acquire it at some time, and it could change. Were it a mere attribute then the history would be lost if the value changed. In some societies it may be acceptable for the parents to choose a religion on their child, and indeed not expect them to change it. To handle this reality (and remain neutral on the subject), perhaps a "cradle-to-grave" date range could be introduced.

Chris

On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 17:25, Eckhard Genßmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,

 

I’m still not sure about the recommended way to capture “religion” in my database – should it be handled as event or as an attribute?

I’ve seen earlier discussions on the list, but I would like to better understand any side-effects.

 

The most of the about 2000 people in my database have never changed religion. The most are either catholic or evangelical (hope that’s the correct translation from German).

So far I’ve entered religion as event  (event-type is “religion” and I typed e.g. “evangelisch” into the description field).

In order to avoid multiple typing the same content, I once started to leverage those events amongst many people with the same religion.

 

However, by leveraging this data, it is no more longer really an “event” – and using attributes may be the better approach.

A combined approach may solve the issue: using attributes for all the people with “static” religion, and replace the attribute by multiple events (possibly with dates) for those people who converted.

But then we have other issues:

  1. it must be ensured, that information for an individual (attributes and events) should occur in reports on the same places (e.g. Navweb shows attributes far away from individual (events) information). That would request a change in Navweb an probably for many other reports as well
  2. What needs to be done to ensure that those “religion” attributes are handled correctly in gedcom exports?
  3. Are there any other areas that need more analysis regarding side effects?

 

I’m using GrampsAIO64-5.1.2-1 on Windows 10 pro (Version 1909)

 

I’m very interested in your thoughts about the topic,

Eckhard

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--
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: Religion - event or attribute?

Sebastian Schubert
In reply to this post by Eckhard Genßmann
Hi Eckhard

Am 02.06.20 um 18:22 schrieb Eckhard Genßmann:
> I’m still not sure about the recommended way to capture “religion” in my
> database – should it be handled as event or as an attribute?

I use events for that which I think is the most consistent approach.
However, every person has her/his event(s).

> The most of the about 2000 people in my database have never changed
> religion. The most are either catholic or evangelical (hope that’s the
> correct translation from German).

Same for me. This is why I stopped entering religion events with dates
for every source I found it in. In 99.9% of the cases, it was the same
religion repeated several times per person. Now, I add just one religion
event without a date and attach the respective citations to it. Only in
one or two cases, I have several religion events.

(It's protestant rather than evangelical, I think)

>
> So far I’ve entered religion as event  (event-type is “religion” and I
> typed e.g. “evangelisch” into the description field).

Yes.

> In order to avoid multiple typing the same content, I once started to
> leverage those events amongst many people with the same religion.

Do you mean you share the event? I am not sure that this a good
approach. By doing this, you connect people who have not even met. I
assume that sharing an event is meant to indicate that several people
participated in one event and not to save some typing.

> A combined approach may solve the issue: using attributes for all the
> people with “static” religion, and replace the attribute by multiple
> events (possibly with dates) for those people who converted.
>
> But then we have other issues:
>
>  1. it must be ensured, that information for an individual (attributes
>     and events) should occur in reports on the same places (e.g. Navweb
>     shows attributes far away from individual (events) information).
>     That would request a change in Navweb an probably for many other
>     reports as well
>  2. What needs to be done to ensure that those “religion” attributes are
>     handled correctly in gedcom exports?
>  3. Are there any other areas that need more analysis regarding side
>     effects?

I don't like this approach because of the inconsistencies you noted.
Other points:
* It's not only reports which show the religion information in different
places; it's in the main gramps program as well. That's confusing.
* If you discover new evidence, you need to change your data instead of
just adding information. If you assumed one person did not change
religion, you would use an attribute. Now you discover a source that
states the person is of another religion. [*] You need to remove the
attribute and create two new events. This feels bad. You have done do a
mistake before, you just haven't had the full information. Using events
in the first place is simpler here. You just add another religion event
with date and add date(s) to the original religion event.


[*] First, if I find "one person" with different religion, I would
assume that there are actually two persons or that there has been a mistake.

Cheers
Sebastian


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