Re: [Gramps-devel] Set of relations used by gramps (was Re: Cousin translations)

[James A. T. <tr...@de...>]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 07:02:58AM +0100, Bo Ros?n wrote:
> s?n 2002-01-27 klockan 22.17 skrev James A. Treacy:
> 
> > great grandfather     great grandfather
> 
> Would that be me my father's father's father or my mother's mother's
> father or one of the other two?
> 
In english, it doesn't matter. You have 4 great grandfathers and they
are all simply called great grandfather.

> > great grandmother     great grandmother
> 
> Similar problem here, they each have separate names.
> The Swedish system is pretty easy actually in this respect, we just
> stack 'em :-)
> Mother is called mor and father, far. Then we just combine these two
> words to arrive at the right relative, with a few possesives thrown in
> here and there.
> 
Let's not go overboard here. I find it hard to believe that if you
wanted to refer to an ancestor 20 generations ago, you would create a
monstrous string to do it. Couldn't languages with such a structure
like you mention simply use 'nth generation ancestor'? Likewise for
the descendant, you could use 'nth generation descendant'.

Remember, we simply need to cover the most common cases. The only place
the more complicated strings would be needed is in a report and if
someone needs a report using a complicated relationship, there may be
cases where language specific reports will be needed. With some
discussion and a bit of compromising we can hopefully minimize that.

-- 
James (Jay) Treacy
tr...@de...