2010/12/19 Nick Hall <nick__hall@hotmail.com>
Benny,

Tim has done a lot of work on the GEPS, and it is now at a stage where I
think that it would be helpful if you could review it.
My main concern is that the Citation Reference editor may by rather
complicated and large. What do you think?

I'll try to find the time to read it this week. A long wiki page that!

Could we combine the Type and Deduction Confidence in the citation
reference? A Transcript type would imply a high confidence, whereas a
deduction would be a lower confidence. We could go down to a "Guess"
which would imply a very low confidence.

I didn't use the Source Confidence when I started to use Gramps, because
I was unsure which value to choose. The values in the GEDCOM standard
(Direct/Primary, Secondary, Questionable, Unreliable) are more obvious
how to use than the Gramps values (Very High, High, Normal, Low, Very
Low). Perhaps we could choose more descriptive values for the Deduction
Type?

I added it to the infolabel in trunk. Yes, we can rename it, but then best both of them I think:
High - Direct/Primary
....

Or does that seem as if we cannot choose?

Benny
 


Nick.



Tim Lyons wrote:
> Thanks for your suggestions Benny, I think we may be moving towards a
> consensus. I have created a GEPS to outline a change.
>
> Benny Malengier wrote:
>
>> I don't think SourceContent
>> must be presented in the interface as a core object. Instead a treeview
>> Source-SourceContent seems more natural to me.
>>
>>
> Thanks for the suggestion. A treeview for the Source View and the selector
> works well.
>
> Benny Malengier wrote:
>
>> I would do the attributes
>> different.
>>
>> Source
>>    1 Title
>>    1 Author
>>    1 Gramps ID
>>    1 Abbr
>>    1 Pulication Information
>>    1 Global Confidence
>>    n Publication Data (key value pairs, eg Publication Date, Publisher,
>> ...)
>>    n MediaRef (Region, Src, attr, notes)  --> Media
>>    n RepoRef (Type, Callnumber)           --> Repo
>>
>> SourceContent
>>     1 Source (GrampsID)
>>     1 Confidence (5 values)
>>     1 Volume
>>     1 Page
>>     1 LogDate
>>     1 Linenumber
>>     1 Position (eg. Upper Left Corner of image)
>>     n Information (key, value pairs, current Data)
>>     n NoteIds
>>     n MediaRef (Region, Src, attr, notes)  --> Media
>>
>>
> I agree except that I wouldn't remove the Notes field from the Source. This
> would be too awkward for people who are already using it, and is relevant
> where the source is not 'large'.
>
> I wonder whether we should keep Volume/Page instead of separate Volume,
> Page, Linenumber and Position for this enhancement. There is a proposal
> (GEPS 018) which would change the fields in the SourceContent according to a
> Source Type.
> http://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_018:_Evidence_style_sources
> I wonder whether it would be better that we wait for this, rather than
> changing the fields twice. In any case, there are plenty of cases where
> breakdowns other than the proposed one are more appropriate.
>
> Benny Malengier wrote:
>
>> SourceContentRef (called Citation in the interface, part of objects with
>> sources)
>>   1 Type: Transcript or Deduction
>>   1 Deduction Confidence (5 values)
>>   1 Argumentation (one line string)
>>   n Note
>>
>>
> I have not included this in the GEPS, because it seems to relate to how
> deductions are stored, and as such may not be directly related to this
> enhancement. Also I am concerned that this may make the user experience too
> complicated. In the GEPS, users who are happy with the existing interface
> will see little change (change always frightens users); those who want more
> will be able to use the additional features.
>
> Benny Malengier wrote:
>
>> So, in this design, one must envision that Source and sourcecontent form
>> one
>> single editor.
>>
>>
> I agree, having a single editor makes things simpler for the user and
> ensures that the workflow does not get more complicated.
>
> Benny Malengier wrote:
>
>> When adding a citation to eg a person, you obtain a treeview
>> source-sourcecontent, so if you select a census entry, you immediately see
>> the data of that entry you stored.
>>
>>
> I agree - a treeview will make it no more complicated to select an existing
> Source or SourceContent than it is at present.
>
> Benny Malengier wrote:
>
>> Confidence is given globally, of the content (same as globally by
>> default),
>> and of the deduction. The SourceContentRef is there to hold the process of
>> deducing information you add to eg a person as coming from a source. In
>> many
>> cases, a pure transcript of the source is done, and no deduction happens,
>> in
>> which case this object contains nothing of interest. If one however makes
>> a
>> deduction, then one can store this here specifically. Eg you find the name
>> Nic__ where you cannot make out what the last hand written letters are,
>> and
>> you save the name as Nick, with reference to this source. Then the
>> sourcereference can indicate why you decide to use Nick and not eg Nicki.
>>
>>
> As I mentioned, I have not included the fields of a SourceContentRef in the
> GEPS. They could be added if there is a general desire to do so.
>
>
> The GEPS is at
> http://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=GEPS_023:_Storing_data_from_large_sources
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lotusphere 2011
Register now for Lotusphere 2011 and learn how
to connect the dots, take your collaborative environment
to the next level, and enter the era of Social Business.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/lotusphere-d2d
_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
Gramps-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel