Re: [Gramps-users] Re : Is there a particular reason why "Divorce" isn't included as a relationship type?

[John W. K. <Joh...@xs...>]

Enno,

On 2017-02-25 16:06, Enno Borgsteede wrote:
> Hello John,
> 
> The simplest answer is that status and type are different things, and a
> relationship type refers to the sort of relationship that people once
> had. Divorce as an event is not a relationship, but rather the end of
> it, and divorced is a status, not a type.

It looks like we're more or less stating the same (albeit in different 
words) in that events are cause for some individual civil status[1] or 
the change thereof, e.g.:

o Birth (event) -> Born (status);
o Marriage (event) -> Married (status);
o Separation (event) -> Separated (status);
o Divorce (event) -> Divorced [from so and so] (status);
o Death (event) -> Died or Deceased (status) and related Widow or 
Widower [from so and so] (status).

> When you take the definitions like this, and software is always based 
> on
> formal definitions, a relation type 'married' as opposed to other 
> types,
> does not end with a divorce. A divorce creates a new status called
> 'divorced' but that does not not mean that the relationship type itself
> is changed.
> 
> I set the relationship between my parents and most other couples in my
> tree to married, because that's what they were. Divorces, separations,
> or deaths, don't change the relationship types that once were.

No, but events such as divorce and death do, at least IMHO.

When a divorce (event) becomes effective or when someone dies (event), 
the civil status of the former or remaining spouse(s) changes either 
permanently or temporarily e.g. when she, he or they remarry at some 
later point in time either to each other or to one or more new spouses.

If the last event, such as e.g. a divorce or passing of one's partner, 
that someone was part of, through e.g. a marriage, the last remaining 
relationship (as well as the related individual civil status if you 
will) can IMHO never be married, but is either divorced or widowed. 
Appropriate related individual civil statuses seem to be divorcée (she), 
divorcé (he), widow (she) or widower (he) of so and so.

Please also consider that the only period in one's life that one is 
unmarried is from the date that one is born to the date of one's first 
marriage. However long one's first marriage may last, one can never be 
unmarried again since one has been married (at least once), yet at the 
same time there may be times in one's life, after that first marriage 
ended, during which one is not married.

> Note that this is how software models the world, and changing the model
> may create inconsistencies, so in general such changes need to be
> avoided. There is a formal meaning that you may not agree to, but that
> doesn't change the intended meaning itself.
> 
> The model is biased, because the people that created it were biased,
> meaning that they had their own interpretations of the meaning of
> marriage, which is quite simplistic, I think, but exists nevertheless.
> We often have to live with that, because the consequences of changing
> meaning afterwards are too high.

This is an area related to this topic that we IMHO should best not 
explore, at least not on this list. Also please don't take any of my 
remarks on this topic as negative persé, but rather as a useful 
discussion about the pro's and con's related to some areas of the use of 
Gramps that one may take ideas from for one's own use of the software 
(as I have already done several times) or maybe its future development.

> 
> regards,
> 
> Enno

[1] http://www.dutchcivillaw.com/legislation/dcctitle044.htm

Thanks and regards, Jk.