From: Richard H. <heb...@ea...> - 2005-07-19 10:39:34
|
-------- Original Message -------- From: - Tue Jul 19 05:42:57 2005 X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00800000 Message-ID: <42D...@ea...> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 05:42:56 -0400 From: Richard Hebert <heb...@ea...> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.5 (X11/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Roitman <sh...@gr...> Subject: Re: [Gramps-devel]Tell me a bedtime story : Additional options in reports References: <4ac...@ma...> <1121737722l.11420l.1l@zen> In-Reply-To: <1121737722l.11420l.1l@zen> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Alex :) ( yes .. does sound like the opening of a letter to some love columnist .. but eh ; ) ) Well .. i was talking with the wife and telling her the other day that reports are fine .. but that what really id like to see her do , is tell a story , make it a history of the family. Impossible to do without a lot of intervention .. I told her .. when i look at the reports , what i see is raw data ... dates , names that do not tell me anything about what happened .. who those people were .. what their professions , jobs were :) Additional options in reports ? What happened to them .. specially to the Daltons and James distant relatives of her :)= ( yes rather funny .. if you know who the Daltons and James were .. ) The wife dont remember that in gramps ... a simple entry for jobs :) Though i been bad .. i need to upgrate to the latest for her. Still .. reports are fine .. if it's to stay as a reference .. but the real job and i might stray from the pure genealogy , is the story .. Tell me this guy's got on the planet in **** dies in **** but im still so far away from having an idea who that person was ... what his story is .. Tell me a bedtime story :) Ric Alex Roitman wrote: >Julio, > >I speak only for myself, so let's maybe wait for other active devels >to chime in or maybe discuss it on IRC? Between 5 and 11pm GMT there's >a good chance to find Don, Martin, and myself there: > channel #gramps at irc.freenode.net > >That said, here's my opinion: > >On 07/17/2005 04:04:39 PM, Julio Sanchez wrote: > > >>I have always found that the existing reports lack all of them >>something that some other report has. >> >>For instance, the Comprehensive Ancestor Report is probably the most >>complete, but lacks options and does not have a Descendant >>counterpart. >> >>The Detailed Ancestor and Descendant Reports are alright in options, >>but do not provide events, alternate names or sources. >> >>The FTM-style reports have sources, names, etc., but do not give extra >>information at each level (parents or children of the person studied). >> >>I needed a report that had all of it and eenie, meenie,.. I settled >>for the Detailed Reports. >> >>To sum up, I have extended both reports to handle other names, events >>and sources, mostly after what is done in the FTM reports. These >>facilities are new options and, since they reuse existing strings, >>they don't seem to need new translations in the text, but a few >>strings are needed for the option panel itself. >> >>Is it OK for me commit this? >> >> > >I would say yes. As everybody agrees, we have too many reports which >do one thing here and the other thing there. It makes sens to everybody >that we reduce the number of reports and instead provide more options >to the few survivors, to incorporate what is already done in the code >into (almost) every report. > >There's this daunting task of reworking reports -- deciding which to >leave in and which to drop, and then porting options existing in the >latter to the former ones. Seems like you're doing just that. Maybe >we need a single ancestor report, single descendant report, single >group report (whatever gets selected by the filter, a section per >person), and that's it, for the text reports. The Comprehensive >Ancestor and the FTM-style reports are the best candidates to start >with. > >The Detailed reports are old and have a lot of ugly heritage code. >I would personally like to get rid of them and to port their unique >functions to the FTM-style reports. But for now, if you already improved >Detailed ones, let's commit them. Then we can merge them with the FTM >ones. That's my take on this. > > > >>On a related topic, I have ported to Graphviz.py the "families as >>stacks" option from the old RelGraph.py that I have missed since I >>changed version. However, both the old code and what I have done >>exhibit a little bit of nonsense in box placement in complex graphs >>and I want to do some experimentation first. >> >>Is it OK to bring this option back as well? >> >> > >Definitely! We dropped this option because the code was tangled and >hard to follow/debug. If you're doing this, by all means bring it back >and fix it. Since the time when we dropped the stack, I had more to do >with GraphViz so I guess I should be able to follow it now and help >fixing it. > >Alex > >P.S. The IRC is a great thing! Whoever is interested in talking things >over on gramps-devel, take my word on this: an hour on IRC is more >effective that few days of emails (most of the time anyway :-). > > > |
From: Alexandre P. <ale...@gm...> - 2005-07-22 03:04:01
|
On 7/19/05, Richard Hebert <heb...@ea...> wrote: > Still .. reports are fine .. if it's to stay as a reference .. but the re= al > job and i might stray from the pure genealogy , is the story .. > Tell me this guy's got on the planet in **** dies in **** but im still > so far away from having an idea who that person was ... what his > story is .. >=20 > Tell me a bedtime story :) You definitely want a report based on data from Events fields, don't you? := ) Someone just needs to enter all that data and customize a report. P.S. Storytelling is a prerogative of human beings. Alexandre |