From: Benny M. <ben...@gm...> - 2013-05-27 07:52:05
|
2013/5/27 Tim Lyons <guy...@gm...> > Benny Malengier wrote > > Devels, > > > > I'd like to tackle http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=2332 > > > > So Data in source, and since recent also in Citation, is not a good > thing, > > and should be extended to be reorderable, ... . > > > > I would convert Data to SourceAttribute, which is like Attribute, but has > > sourceattributetype fields instead of attributetype (which is person > > related). > > Now, if I make types, I'd like to immideately define all types as needed > > for GEPS 018: Evidence style sources, using fields described on > > http://jytangledweb.org/genealogy/evidencestyle/ > > > > My question :-). There in > > http://jytangledweb.org/genealogy/evidencestyle/evidence_style.ods there > > are three types, L, S and F. I suppose Long, Short, Full? > > Can't find that in 1-2-3 on that page, and did not read sources, but I > > suppose many of you know what those L, S and F stand for exactly. > > > When this was discussed before, the suggestion was made to have only a > single 'thing' namely Attribute in place of two different concepts namely > Attribute and Data. In other words, to replace Data with Attribute. > I'm not in favour of this. Overly complex, or overdesigned in my opinion > > This would reduce complexity for implementation, maintenance and > understanding for users. It is true that it would allow circular > references, > but these are already possible with source and media, and as some people > have indicated (for source and media) there might be some situations where > it is sensible to have such references (so it might also be sensible for > Attributes). > > > I presume that you will implement this change in a GEPS branch, as it is a > significant change, and has effects in many places. > It is already in trunk and normally 100 % working :-) However, not Attribute as you think here, but a replacement for Data. For simplicity, I call it in the GUI now Attribute for the sake of not confusing users, but for developers, they are not Attributes. They are Attributes without Notes and Source. In my view, it makes no sense to add Source -> Attribute -> Source. I agee with the view that attribute to source are 'key, value' elements as found in the source, or describing the source. So what is in trunk fixes bug 2332. I'll make a GEP branch though for changing the GUI to use evidence style. I intend to make editing of the attribute possible in the treeview though, and do that in trunk. Benny |