On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Benny Malengier <benny.malengier@gmail.com> wrote:
2009/7/8 Emrys Williams <emrys.williams@eversholt.net>:
> Why not just have the top name in the list of names be used as the
> "default" name?
> Gets rid of the "default" setting
> gets rid of the idea of having two lists, one of which may have only one
> member
> Allows assignment of source (etc) to default name in exactly same way as
> all other names

You already can attach a source to the default name (see the edit
button at top of person editor).
The only thing you cannot do with the default name is delete it.
Everybody has a name, even if it is blank as far as GRAMPS is
concerned. This functionality will be easier to reach with default
name in the name list.

You are right that one could do away with the distinction, however,
from a data entry point of view, I believe it is interesting to have
the name fields of the default  name visible in the top part of the
person editor, just as any other application. So even if we do not
make a distinction, there would be a distinction. In that case, I
rather show the distinction.

My experience is that the default name changes.  Typically, I find a person's name in a public document like a census sheet, then I find a more complete name on a legal document somewhere.  We need to be able to source both names and have the sources remain with the name they apply to when the name is replaced by a new default.