What version of Gramps do you use?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
127 messages Options
1 ... 4567
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Douglas Bainbridge: more Place problems - what to do about intermittent existence

Michael Stockhausen
Hi Doug,
thanks for the file.
I think the queston mark issue arises
a) because of the language codes. I think you don’t need them if you define a time span anyway.
b) if the place is restricted e.g. Schrimm from 1939 to 1945. It is not valid anymore, so Gramps doens’t know what to take.
 
As mentioned before, I think it would be sufficient to have only one Schrimm/Srem instead of three.
 
Regards
Michael
 
From: Doug
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place problems - what to do about intermittent existence
 
Hi Michael,

Herewith a corrected tree which also has alternative names. Filtering on one name finds the alternatives.
Let me know what you think.

Doug



On 30/10/16 15:05, Doug wrote:
Hi Michael,
Thanks for the files.
I've made some trees from them (stockhausen 1,2,3.gramps) but you'll see they don't display well with the enclosed by and enclosing gramplets - date inconsistencies, etc.

In stockhausen4.gramps Kornik, etc. are split into before 1939 and after 1945, and the tree displays are much better. The auto-generated titles are complete but only for the paths of recent titles (compare Kornik I with Kornik II, or Srem I with SremII). This isn't due to data errors but a bug? deficiency? in the auto-generation.

Let me know what you think.

Doug


On 29/10/16 14:35, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
Hi Doug,
here are the files.
I am still not sure which of these options I want to take.
I am currently collecting the information - which city, area
belonged to which administrative body at which time.
Then I will see if it was more structural changes or just
pure re-naming. I will decide on that basis to use alt1 or
alt2.
For example, when the Germans took over in 1939/49, for my
area of interest (Lodz and surrounding villages), the
general structure was kept. Powiats were re-named to
Landkreis and that was it.
I can keep the powiats, re-name them to Landkreis (rural
county) and attach them to (a newly created) Wartheland. In
fact, I could even re-name Woj poznanskie to Warthegau for
those 6 years and attach all counties in the Posen area and
also in the Lodz area to Woj poznanskie= Warthegau.
I assume this is too confusing and too difficult to follow
my thoughts.
Let me know if you have any questions or comments.

Enjoy the time with your grandchildren.

Michael



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Doug
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:34 PM
To: Michael Stockhausen
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place
problems - what to do about intermittent existence

Hi Michael,

The grandchildren will be leaving tomorrow, so I hope to be
able to get down to your data soon.
However, I can't seem to find the attachments to your
e-mail. Would you mind sending them again?
Thanks,

Doug

On 26/10/16 23:54, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
Hi Doug,
thanks for sending me your place data.
The structure is quite complicated, so I need some more time
to understand it.
I am creating a few events to see the result (place title in
the event). This is what counts, I think.

I have already noticed
- the place title in some cases contains question marks, so
there must be errors in there somewhere
- Poland is attached to France or USSR for certain periods
of time: did you do that intentionally?
- Why do you see a need to have the period of partitions?


I have also attached two files with my data.
Alt1 is my original idea; alternative 2 the one Enno
suggested (if I understood well).
I am just testing for the time being, so I just have one
village plus three periods in Alt2.
Look at the result in the people view.
If you need more explanation, just let me know.
I think Alt2 is better.
You may have seen the questions I asked to Enno. I will
forward that email to you again in a minute.

Michael


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Doug
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 7:25 PM
To: Michael Stockhausen
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place
problems - what to do about intermittent existence

On 25/10/16 21:12, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
<snip>

Hi Michael,

Herewith the .gramps file with place data (incomplete) for
Poland.

Doug




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Command Line: Reinvented for Modern Developers
Did the resurgence of CLI tooling catch you by surprise?
Reconnect with the command line and become more productive. 
Learn the new .NET and ASP.NET CLI. Get your free copy!
http://sdm.link/telerik


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

 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Douglas Bainbridge: more Place problems - what to do about intermittent existence

Doug-11
Hi Michael,

Thanks for provoking me to look at it again; and you're
right, it doesn't need to be split.
If I understand you correctly I think you are saying the
language code question marks arise through putting a time
span on the principal name, i.e. Srem before 1918, and after
1945. If Srem is not time-spanned at all, Schrimm between
1939-45 is OK. This is what I find.

Would you mind looking at this last file and confirming if
it corresponds to the situation?

Doug



On 31/10/16 18:18, Michael Stockhausen wrote:

> Hi Doug,
> thanks for the file.
> I think the queston mark issue arises
> a) because of the language codes. I think you don’t need
> them if you define a time span anyway.
> b) if the place is restricted e.g. Schrimm from 1939 to
> 1945. It is not valid anymore, so Gramps doens’t know what
> to take.
>
> As mentioned before, I think it would be sufficient to have
> only one Schrimm/Srem instead of three.
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
> *From:* Doug
> *Sent:* Monday, October 31, 2016 5:36 PM
> *To:* Michael Stockhausen ; Gramps-Users
> *Subject:* Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place
> problems - what to do about intermittent existence
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Herewith a corrected tree which also has alternative names.
> Filtering on one name finds the alternatives.
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Doug
>
>
>
> On 30/10/16 15:05, Doug wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>> Thanks for the files.
>> I've made some trees from them (stockhausen 1,2,3.gramps)
>> but you'll see they don't display well with the enclosed
>> by and enclosing gramplets - date inconsistencies, etc.
>>
>> In stockhausen4.gramps Kornik, etc. are split into before
>> 1939 and after 1945, and the tree displays are much
>> better. The auto-generated titles are complete but only
>> for the paths of recent titles (compare Kornik I with
>> Kornik II, or Srem I with SremII). This isn't due to data
>> errors but a bug? deficiency? in the auto-generation.
>>
>> Let me know what you think.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>>
>> On 29/10/16 14:35, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
>>> Hi Doug,
>>> here are the files.
>>> I am still not sure which of these options I want to take.
>>> I am currently collecting the information - which city, area
>>> belonged to which administrative body at which time.
>>> Then I will see if it was more structural changes or just
>>> pure re-naming. I will decide on that basis to use alt1 or
>>> alt2.
>>> For example, when the Germans took over in 1939/49, for my
>>> area of interest (Lodz and surrounding villages), the
>>> general structure was kept. Powiats were re-named to
>>> Landkreis and that was it.
>>> I can keep the powiats, re-name them to Landkreis (rural
>>> county) and attach them to (a newly created) Wartheland. In
>>> fact, I could even re-name Woj poznanskie to Warthegau for
>>> those 6 years and attach all counties in the Posen area and
>>> also in the Lodz area to Woj poznanskie= Warthegau.
>>> I assume this is too confusing and too difficult to follow
>>> my thoughts.
>>> Let me know if you have any questions or comments.
>>>
>>> Enjoy the time with your grandchildren.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Doug
>>> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:34 PM
>>> To: Michael Stockhausen
>>> Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place
>>> problems - what to do about intermittent existence
>>>
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> The grandchildren will be leaving tomorrow, so I hope to be
>>> able to get down to your data soon.
>>> However, I can't seem to find the attachments to your
>>> e-mail. Would you mind sending them again?
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Doug
>>>
>>> On 26/10/16 23:54, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
>>>> Hi Doug,
>>>> thanks for sending me your place data.
>>>> The structure is quite complicated, so I need some more
>>>> time
>>>> to understand it.
>>>> I am creating a few events to see the result (place
>>>> title in
>>>> the event). This is what counts, I think.
>>>>
>>>> I have already noticed
>>>> - the place title in some cases contains question marks, so
>>>> there must be errors in there somewhere
>>>> - Poland is attached to France or USSR for certain periods
>>>> of time: did you do that intentionally?
>>>> - Why do you see a need to have the period of partitions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have also attached two files with my data.
>>>> Alt1 is my original idea; alternative 2 the one Enno
>>>> suggested (if I understood well).
>>>> I am just testing for the time being, so I just have one
>>>> village plus three periods in Alt2.
>>>> Look at the result in the people view.
>>>> If you need more explanation, just let me know.
>>>> I think Alt2 is better.
>>>> You may have seen the questions I asked to Enno. I will
>>>> forward that email to you again in a minute.
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From:
>>>> Doug
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 7:25 PM
>>>> To: Michael Stockhausen
>>>> Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place
>>>> problems - what to do about intermittent existence
>>>>
>>>> On 25/10/16 21:12, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>> Herewith the .gramps file with place data (incomplete) for
>>>> Poland.
>>>>
>>>> Doug
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> The Command Line: Reinvented for Modern Developers
>> Did the resurgence of CLI tooling catch you by surprise?
>> Reconnect with the command line and become more productive.
>> Learn the new .NET and ASP.NET CLI. Get your free copy!
>> http://sdm.link/telerik
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gramps-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users

check.gramps (1K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Douglas Bainbridge: more Place problems - what to do about intermittent existence

Michael Stockhausen
Hi Doug

Looks good.
You could consider having Poland only once, 3rd Rep after 1945 and 2nd Rep
1918 to 1939.
But both options are ok, I guess.
I will send an email to the list later today, maybe this info is also
interesting for you.

Michael

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
From: Doug
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 12:41 PM
To: Michael Stockhausen ; Gramps-Users
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place problems - what
to do about intermittent existence

Hi Michael,

Thanks for provoking me to look at it again; and you're
right, it doesn't need to be split.
If I understand you correctly I think you are saying the
language code question marks arise through putting a time
span on the principal name, i.e. Srem before 1918, and after
1945. If Srem is not time-spanned at all, Schrimm between
1939-45 is OK. This is what I find.

Would you mind looking at this last file and confirming if
it corresponds to the situation?

Doug



On 31/10/16 18:18, Michael Stockhausen wrote:

> Hi Doug,
> thanks for the file.
> I think the queston mark issue arises
> a) because of the language codes. I think you don’t need
> them if you define a time span anyway.
> b) if the place is restricted e.g. Schrimm from 1939 to
> 1945. It is not valid anymore, so Gramps doens’t know what
> to take.
>
> As mentioned before, I think it would be sufficient to have
> only one Schrimm/Srem instead of three.
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
> *From:* Doug
> *Sent:* Monday, October 31, 2016 5:36 PM
> *To:* Michael Stockhausen ; Gramps-Users
> *Subject:* Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place
> problems - what to do about intermittent existence
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Herewith a corrected tree which also has alternative names.
> Filtering on one name finds the alternatives.
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Doug
>
>
>
> On 30/10/16 15:05, Doug wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>> Thanks for the files.
>> I've made some trees from them (stockhausen 1,2,3.gramps)
>> but you'll see they don't display well with the enclosed
>> by and enclosing gramplets - date inconsistencies, etc.
>>
>> In stockhausen4.gramps Kornik, etc. are split into before
>> 1939 and after 1945, and the tree displays are much
>> better. The auto-generated titles are complete but only
>> for the paths of recent titles (compare Kornik I with
>> Kornik II, or Srem I with SremII). This isn't due to data
>> errors but a bug? deficiency? in the auto-generation.
>>
>> Let me know what you think.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>>
>> On 29/10/16 14:35, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
>>> Hi Doug,
>>> here are the files.
>>> I am still not sure which of these options I want to take.
>>> I am currently collecting the information - which city, area
>>> belonged to which administrative body at which time.
>>> Then I will see if it was more structural changes or just
>>> pure re-naming. I will decide on that basis to use alt1 or
>>> alt2.
>>> For example, when the Germans took over in 1939/49, for my
>>> area of interest (Lodz and surrounding villages), the
>>> general structure was kept. Powiats were re-named to
>>> Landkreis and that was it.
>>> I can keep the powiats, re-name them to Landkreis (rural
>>> county) and attach them to (a newly created) Wartheland. In
>>> fact, I could even re-name Woj poznanskie to Warthegau for
>>> those 6 years and attach all counties in the Posen area and
>>> also in the Lodz area to Woj poznanskie= Warthegau.
>>> I assume this is too confusing and too difficult to follow
>>> my thoughts.
>>> Let me know if you have any questions or comments.
>>>
>>> Enjoy the time with your grandchildren.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Doug
>>> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 1:34 PM
>>> To: Michael Stockhausen
>>> Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place
>>> problems - what to do about intermittent existence
>>>
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> The grandchildren will be leaving tomorrow, so I hope to be
>>> able to get down to your data soon.
>>> However, I can't seem to find the attachments to your
>>> e-mail. Would you mind sending them again?
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Doug
>>>
>>> On 26/10/16 23:54, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
>>>> Hi Doug,
>>>> thanks for sending me your place data.
>>>> The structure is quite complicated, so I need some more
>>>> time
>>>> to understand it.
>>>> I am creating a few events to see the result (place
>>>> title in
>>>> the event). This is what counts, I think.
>>>>
>>>> I have already noticed
>>>> - the place title in some cases contains question marks, so
>>>> there must be errors in there somewhere
>>>> - Poland is attached to France or USSR for certain periods
>>>> of time: did you do that intentionally?
>>>> - Why do you see a need to have the period of partitions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have also attached two files with my data.
>>>> Alt1 is my original idea; alternative 2 the one Enno
>>>> suggested (if I understood well).
>>>> I am just testing for the time being, so I just have one
>>>> village plus three periods in Alt2.
>>>> Look at the result in the people view.
>>>> If you need more explanation, just let me know.
>>>> I think Alt2 is better.
>>>> You may have seen the questions I asked to Enno. I will
>>>> forward that email to you again in a minute.
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From:
>>>> Doug
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 7:25 PM
>>>> To: Michael Stockhausen
>>>> Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Douglas Bainbridge: more Place
>>>> problems - what to do about intermittent existence
>>>>
>>>> On 25/10/16 21:12, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>> Herewith the .gramps file with place data (incomplete) for
>>>> Poland.
>>>>
>>>> Doug
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> The Command Line: Reinvented for Modern Developers
>> Did the resurgence of CLI tooling catch you by surprise?
>> Reconnect with the command line and become more productive.
>> Learn the new .NET and ASP.NET CLI. Get your free copy!
>> http://sdm.link/telerik
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gramps-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
>
>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Places - Alternative names

Michael Stockhausen
In reply to this post by Doug-11
I have again experimented a bit with place names and alternative names.
In my test case:
Breslau before Feb 1945, Wrocław after Jan 1945
I want
- the place name in an event to be historically correct
- to work with the German version, as a) I don't want to type in the Polish
diacritics and b) I sometimes don't even know (and care about) the Polish
names

The options I tried were
- using language codes "de" and/or "pl" or none
- using dates (from .. to.., before..., after...) or not
- having Wrocław as main name and Breslau as Alternative name or vice versa
- and various combinations of these options


I noticed:
- no matter which option I use, the side bar filter will always find both
name variations
- I will not use the language codes, as I want historically correct names.
If I enter "de" for Breslau, I will always see Breslau (if I have no time
restriction). Or I get "?", if Breslau is not valid anymore (=Breslau before
1945)
- When you enter an event and you want to choose an existing place, you can
search i.a. by "name contains" or "title contains". The "name" is the main
name, the "Title" is the name that is still valid today (=no end date).
- If the main name is without restriction (no dates and no language), there
is nothing you can do with the Alternative name except filtering with the
side bar.
- You can enter several Alternative names with "from...to" or "before...",
"after..". You can also enter an alternative name without any further date
restriction.
For example: the main name is Litzmannstadt, valid from 1940 to 1945.
Alternative name is Łódź without any dates. This name will then be valid any
time except 1940-45. It doesn't work the other way around, though. If the
main name is without dates, it is always taken.
- You can also do this with several names.
Example: Main name Litzmannstadt 1940-45, Alternative names Lodsch 1915-18
and Łódź (without dates). But attention: the order within the Alt names is
important. The names defined by dates have to be first in line and the one
without dates must the last one (as a kind of default value: "whenever no
other name is defined, take this name"); any names under the default name
will be disregarded


I think I will do as follows, as this suits my needs most:
- create the place with the German name "before 1945" or "from xxx to 1945"
- put the Polish name in the Alt name field without time restriction; if I
have more than one Alt name, I will enter all or all but one with dates in
Alt names.
- When entering an event, I can select the German name with the "name
contains" option and the Polish name with the "title contains" option
- The title in an event is historically correct
- The place name in the place overview is the German name and in the title
column I have the Polish name plus current hierarchy

Michael



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Places - Alternative names

Philip Weiss
Some comments inline:

On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 5:36 AM, Michael Stockhausen <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have again experimented a bit with place names and alternative names.
In my test case:
Breslau before Feb 1945, Wrocław after Jan 1945

This will only work for whatever length of time you have set in gramps preferences.  IIRC, the default is 50 years.  So 'before Feb 1945' will cause it to be named Breslau from Feb 1895 to Jan 1945.  To handle this, I use ranges exclusively in the date fields for places.  I picked 1000 for beginning of time and 3000 for end of time.  So mine would read 'from 1000 to Jan 1945' and 'from Feb 1945 to 3000'.



I want
- the place name in an event to be historically correct
- to work with the German version, as a) I don't want to type in the Polish
diacritics and b) I sometimes don't even know (and care about) the Polish
names

The options I tried were
- using language codes "de" and/or "pl" or none

According to Nick (in a bug I filed), the proper way to do this is to leave the language field blank for the name as locals call the place.  I.e., most of the time no language code should be used.  Use a language code for the name as it is in a language used elsewhere.  I.e., København would have no language code, and the alternative name of 'Copenhagen' should have a language code of 'en'.  United States would also have no language code even though it's the same language as Copenhagen (which does get a language code) because that's what locals call it.  Forenede Stater for an alternative name would have the language code of 'da' (for Danish), if I chose to include that in the list.

According to Nick in that bug, Gramps does not currently deal with places that have dual language  place names.  E.g., both the Hebrew and Arabic names for Jerusalem are used by inhabitants. There's a hole in our coverage there.

 
- using dates (from .. to.., before..., after...) or not
- having Wrocław as main name and Breslau as Alternative name or vice versa
- and various combinations of these options


I noticed:
- no matter which option I use, the side bar filter will always find both
name variations
- I will not use the language codes, as I want historically correct names.
If I enter "de" for Breslau, I will always see Breslau (if I have no time
restriction). Or I get "?", if Breslau is not valid anymore (=Breslau before
1945)
- When you enter an event and you want to choose an existing place, you can
search i.a. by "name contains" or "title contains". The "name" is the main
name, the "Title" is the name that is still valid today (=no end date).
- If the main name is without restriction (no dates and no language), there
is nothing you can do with the Alternative name except filtering with the
side bar.
- You can enter several Alternative names with "from...to" or "before...",
"after..". You can also enter an alternative name without any further date
restriction.
For example: the main name is Litzmannstadt, valid from 1940 to 1945.
Alternative name is Łódź without any dates. This name will then be valid any
time except 1940-45. It doesn't work the other way around, though. If the
main name is without dates, it is always taken.
- You can also do this with several names.
Example: Main name Litzmannstadt 1940-45, Alternative names Lodsch 1915-18
and Łódź (without dates). But attention: the order within the Alt names is
important. The names defined by dates have to be first in line and the one
without dates must the last one (as a kind of default value: "whenever no
other name is defined, take this name"); any names under the default name
will be disregarded


I think I will do as follows, as this suits my needs most:
- create the place with the German name "before 1945" or "from xxx to 1945"
- put the Polish name in the Alt name field without time restriction; if I
have more than one Alt name, I will enter all or all but one with dates in
Alt names.
- When entering an event, I can select the German name with the "name
contains" option and the Polish name with the "title contains" option
- The title in an event is historically correct
- The place name in the place overview is the German name and in the title
column I have the Polish name plus current hierarchy

I can't say how well that will work because I use automatically generated titles, but I suspect you will run into issues as Title isn't really meant for 'the name that is valid today'.  Things may seem okay, but it's going to break if you ever have to switch to generated titles, and reports and whatnot treat the field differently than how you are using it.

I've gotten into the habit of making the current name the name as it is today, and then listing past names in reverse chronological order in alternative names, sing date ranges for all of them.  (I also list the enclosing places in reverse chronological order as well.).  I believe Gramps mostly picks for display the first name that is valid from order listing, so some consistency in my ordering helps.  By the first name that is valid, I mean that if there is no range, that one will get picked over a later listed name that has a date range if an event falls into the date range.  This is particularly important if the ranges overlap and an event date falls into the overlap.  Nick, please correct me if I'm wrong about this.

Phil.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Places - Alternative names

Michael Stockhausen
<This will only work for whatever length of time you have set in gramps preferences.  IIRC, the default is 50 years.  So 'before Feb 1945' will cause it to be named Breslau from Feb 1895 to Jan 1945.  To handle this, I use <ranges exclusively in the date fields for places.  I picked 1000 for beginning of time and 3000 for end of time.  So mine would read 'from 1000 to Jan 1945' and 'from Feb 1945 to 3000'.
 
I entered an event for 1200 and correctly (from a technical perspective) got “Breslau”.
Are you sure the 50 years are also for places, or just people?

 
 
<I can't say how well that will work because I use automatically generated titles, but I suspect you will run into issues as Title isn't really meant for 'the name that is valid today'.  Things may seem okay, but it's going to break <if you ever have to switch to generated titles, and reports and whatnot treat the field differently than how you are using it.
 
 
I also use the automatically generated titles. hat I meant to say is that I believe the titles are generated by using the currently valid name and hierarchy. Currently valid = no end date or end date after today.
 
 
 
<I've gotten into the habit of making the current name the name as it is today, and then listing past names in reverse chronological order in alternative names, sing date ranges for all of them. 
In general, I intend to apply this same rule. But for the formerly German provinces, I will make an exception. This is my personal preference, of course. My ancestors lived in “Birnbaum” pre-1820 for example. If I read “Międzychód” in my database, I will never recognize that this is the place I am searching for. For me, it is sufficient to have this name as Alt name (post 1945).
 
Michael

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi


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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Places - Alternative names

Doug-11
On 01/11/16 21:58, Michael Stockhausen wrote:
<This will only work for whatever length of time you have set in gramps preferences.  IIRC, the default is 50 years.  So 'before Feb 1945' will cause it to be named Breslau from Feb 1895 to Jan 1945.  To handle this, I use <ranges exclusively in the date fields for places.  I picked 1000 for beginning of time and 3000 for end of time.  So mine would read 'from 1000 to Jan 1945' and 'from Feb 1945 to 3000'.
 
I entered an event for 1200 and correctly (from a technical perspective) got “Breslau”.
Are you sure the 50 years are also for places, or just people?

 
 
<I can't say how well that will work because I use automatically generated titles, but I suspect you will run into issues as Title isn't really meant for 'the name that is valid today'.  Things may seem okay, but it's going to break <if you ever have to switch to generated titles, and reports and whatnot treat the field differently than how you are using it.
 
 
I also use the automatically generated titles. hat I meant to say is that I believe the titles are generated by using the currently valid name and hierarchy. Currently valid = no end date or end date after today.
 
 
 
<I've gotten into the habit of making the current name the name as it is today, and then listing past names in reverse chronological order in alternative names, sing date ranges for all of them. 
In general, I intend to apply this same rule. But for the formerly German provinces, I will make an exception. This is my personal preference, of course. My ancestors lived in “Birnbaum” pre-1820 for example. If I read “MiÄ™dzychód” in my database, I will never recognize that this is the place I am searching for. For me, it is sufficient to have this name as Alt name (post 1945).
 
Michael


Hi Michael and Philip,

I hope you're keeping a record of your comments. They'll be invaluable when the Wiki on Places get written/updated.

Doug

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
1 ... 4567