From: Gerald B. <ger...@gm...> - 2008-06-29 22:55:42
|
I believe that gramps is working as designed, if not as expected. I would be curious to know how other packages do with this format, if anything. On 6/29/08, Michael Lightfoot <mic...@ca...> wrote: > On Monday 30 June 2008 07:24:06 Martin Ewing AA6E wrote: >> >> Dates were contemporaneously written in fractional form in the years >> before 1752. Genealogical software like gramps should honor the system >> -- not require us to make some conversion of the source data. >> > Perhaps. The use of fractional dates is not consistent, at least not in the > parish records I have transcribed. > >> There is a useful web page on this at http://www.cree.ie/genuki/dates.htm >> . >> >> I stand ready to be corrected... This is all a little new to me! >> >> I am preparing a bug report. Meanwhile, I am not sure how to treat >> fractional year dates in gramps. >> > I use the Julian format which used the old civil year up until 1752. That > year there were two official changes. Firstly, 1751 lost nearly three > months > when new years day was standardised on Jan 1 and secondly when 13 days were > skipped in September 1752 (ie Wed 2nd was followed by Thu 14th). > > -- > ==== > Michael Lightfoot > Canberra, Australia > mic...@ca... > ==== > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-users mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users > -- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com |