TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2001-03 > 0983546259


From: Jim Patrick <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] FILTER problem
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 10:17:39 -0500
References: <4.1.20010301221244.024c73a8@pop.mis.net>
In-Reply-To: <4.1.20010301221244.024c73a8@pop.mis.net>


On Fri, 02 Mar 2001 00:05:38 -0500, you wrote:

>I think (reading in between the lines) that what Cheri is wanting is to
>provide some other method of arranging tags particularly when changing the
>Sort Date for a tag for one person places the tag incorrectly for the other
>Principal and/or for a Witness. Assigning Sort Dates so that all parties
>have the tag sorted properly can be a bit comples at times. While I have
>had this situation occur, it is not one that occurs often although
>apparently Cheri does have it a lot.

To clarify a bit. The original (and I see it as valid) wish was
that unTagged and unSorted events do not appear in any _logical_ order
on the screen. Despite all the "What-If"s other people have come up
with, the vast majority of people's lives fall in normal order:
birth before children,
children before death,
death before burial, etc etc.

>>One of my particular *complaints* is when married
>>name tags are automatically created - based on the marriage date - and they
>>appear before the marriage tag. Means an automated process which saves time
>>(great) defeats its purpose because you have to then manually edit the tag
>>to give it a sort date after the marriage date.

Another area where the event should be automatically linked to the
marriage date plus some time. Not only does the Nam-Marr appear
before the Marriage, but if the Marriage date is changed the Nam-Marr
date stays the same -- absolutely wrong in the majority of cases. The
present software behavior mandates a lot of extra keystrokes, and
shows the events in the wrong order.

>This is another point that some users make in regard to undated tags (and
>this may be Cheri's rather than the paragraph above) is that there should
>be a general sequence to tags such that undated tags always are sequenced
>in a certain order -- such as Birth, Baptism or Christening, Education,
>Graduation, Employment, Marriage, Illness, Will, Death, Burial, Probate. .....

Undated tags _should_ take a default order. Nothing wrong with a
sortorder over-ride, but in the absence of dates, in reality they
normally do fall in a certain sequence. Just like the assumption of
120 years maximum lifespan, there are basic assumption about people
that: a) Normally occur, and b) Save data entry time.

>The problem is that except for Birth, all other tags can and often do come
>at different times in a person's life. There could even be an Illness
>before Birth (although usually we don't record it for the child even if it
>results in a mis-carriage or stillbirth). I have even seen where a
>marriage was performed for a couple of which one party was deceased --- a
>minor technicality. <g>

As stated before, these are exceptions, and in the absence of dates,
should have some defaults. You'd raise-heck if you had to manually
enter the server path for every single one of these emails: software's
role is to reduce rote human labor.

>As for the married Name tag coming before the Marriage tag, I see your
>point, but can't get too enthused over it as I don't print those tags in
>reports and the sequence in the Person View doesn't bother me. Even if I
>printed the tags, I don't think it would bother me as I would be editing
>the report so that it read something like "She changed her name to Jones
>when she married John Jones...." Thus the tag would be in the correct
>order anyway.

The Nam-Marr should be linked to occur after the Marriage event.
Linked means that when the Marriage event changes, the Nam-Marr
changes automatically with it. (Over-ride available, of course.)

I'd go so far as to suggest the option of using a linked Nam-Marr
until next Nam-Marr, plus the option to choose which Nam-Marr:
Jane Eliza Christian m. John Samuel Patrick
Add Nam-Marr? _x_Y__N
Unlink to Marriage?___Y _x_N
____ Jane E. Patrick?
____ Jane C. Patrick?
____ Jane E. Christian-Patrick?

<snipped good adoption discussion>

This thread: