TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-07 > 1026151697


From: Diana Powell <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] 5.02 relationship tags
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 11:09:47 -0700
References: <BBELINAJCPNPOALLDGONOELEDFAA.clcasper@sprynet.com> <3D270E0F.C13F064A@sbcglobal.net> <3D299960.D3D2FA@minn.net>


Ted Meikle wrote:

> I appreciate your creativity in trying to come up with a
> workaround and your sharing it with the list.

And I appreciate your taking the time to read what I had posted and
comment on it - the topic seems to resurface periodically, which means a
lot of us are still struggling with it. Bob posted several detailed
messages back in 2001 explaining how the ADO, CAN, etc. tags came into
existence and describing how he felt they should be used. I have
printed his messages and read and reread them but I may be after
something I just can't do, eg. I want to make the parent-child-ADO
relationship primary (with appropriate details in the text), but in a
journal style report I want it clear when you are looking at a person in
the fifth generation that there is an adoptive link further back up the
chain in the first or second generation.

> However, this idea will not work if child is a biological child of > one parent and an adoptive child of the other, because it will
> not distinguish which line is adoptive.

Yes, as soon as I saw your posting to Cheri on the same topic, I
thought, Uh, Oh. I have to admit I have been working with adoptive
situations where neither parent was the biological parent.

Ted, I am curious how you are handling this situation in your own
reports?

Diana

This thread: