TMG-L Archives
Archiver > TMG > 2003-06 > 1054514588
From:
Subject: Re: [TMG] Automatic "relation" tag - Opinions wanted
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 20:43:08 -0400
References: <5.1.1.6.0.20030601140128.02d4a030@mail.fscv.net>
In-Reply-To: <3EDA5E73.65CBA742@infoave.net>
Richard
At 04:13 PM 1/06/2003, Richard Brogger wrote:
><snip>
>Do you want the relationship tags to be generated one time and semi
>permanently added to the list of tags or do you want them generated each
>time you open Person View? I use very small data sets and I can live with
>either method. However, I can not see someone with a large data set
>wanting to slow things down even more.
I would want the relationship tags to be generated on request only. I am
currently comparing two versions of a dataset with a total of about 60,000
people in the two datasets. Generating the tags each time the Person View
was opened would make the feature unusable for me. Generating the tags the
way it is currently done in TMG5 would be fine.
>Generating the tags would not be a big deal. John Cardinal might be able
>to do that with Utility 5.
It would be a little cleaner to have it implemented in TMG itself but if we
are dealing with a tag the tag could certainly be generated by a utility.
>However, if Joseph is related to 2,000 people in your data set,
>opening Person View for Joseph would be something to behold because he
>would have 2,002 relationship tags. (assuming that you used 3 focus
>persons) That fact means that something has to be added to TMG so that
>2,000 of those relationship tags do not appear in Joseph's Details
>unless you want them to appear.
What I visualize is more like the current auto relationship tag with the
capability to have a list of people who would be the focus of the
relationship calculations.
If I set up my list of three people for auto relationship tags, then at the
top of each Person View would be three relationship tags.
I think creating a relationship table for every possible relationship as
taking overly long and using up storage space unnecessarily. Creating an
entry in a table for all the relationships for each person requested is an
interesting idea. Then when that person's relationships are toggled off
there could be an option to either save or delete the inactive
relationships in the table. If the relationships were saved it would only
take a moment to toggle them back to active mode. If the relationships were
not saved then they would have to be rebuilt.
>Another advantage to semi permanent relationship tags is that they
>would have sentences that could be used in reports.
I'm not into printed output yet but it sounds reasonable to have these
relationship tags set up like most tags.
>Let's forget the Automatic "relation" tag for a moment. Instead, let's
>think about generation of Custom Tags as secondary output of a report.
>
><snip>
>
>Let's say that one makes a non person called "Rutherford Cemetery".
>Using the secondary output of a report, a "Cemetery" tag is generated
>for everyone buried in Rutherford Cemetery and they are made P2. When
>the user went to the Rutherford Cemetery person, P1, that Detail would
>show everyone buried in that cemetery. Now that sort of flips the
>coin. I would not want the Cemetery tag to appear for P2 but I would
>want it to appear for P1.
I would think that the tags would be valuable in both places:
P1: the tags show everyone buried in the cemetery
P2: the tag shows where that person is buried
Walt
This thread: