Re: [Gramps-users] Place Cleanup Gramplet preferences

[Richard T. <ric...@gm...>]

Interesting.

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:59 AM Emy...@ya... <emy...@ya...>
wrote:

> My wild guess is that the Places enhancement in the next release may have
> support aliased IDs for multiple (parallel) geographical data schemes. This
> may be necessary for data harmonization compatibility.
>
> Say that you want to store the compatible IDs for GeoNames, ISO 3166,
> & UN/LOCODE sytems while also maintaining Gramps more limited IDs. And
> there is no doubt that these systems will evolve and change with time.
> (Like the GPS coordinates have changed over time as mapping systems changed
> and with plate tectonic based continental drift.) If you have the ability
> to store all those IDs (in addition to the Gramps ID), then you will be
> able to move seamlessly between systems & take advantage of the disparity
> of features.
>
> Internally, Gramps doesn't care since the IDs shown to Users are just a
> lookup handles to the internal pointers.
>
> That said, the ID in Gramps IS important to Filter rules because they use
> the ID rather than the internal pointer handle. But it isn't important for
> linked records in your Notes because those invisibly use the handle. Thus
> re-numbering IDs will break filter rules but not linked Notes.
>
> (I recently re-numbered my records because I'd outstripped the leading
> zeroes in the ID auto-generator and sorting Persons or Events by ID no
> longer approximated the age of the record.  That re-numbering appears to
> have broken my bookmarks and a few other items that appear to have also
> unexpectedly used IDs instead of pointers. Still isolating what was
> affected.)
>
> The use of alias IDs makes sense elsewhere too. Just like I'll want to
> store the ID for FamilySearch, Ancestry, WikiTree & FindAGrave alongside of
> their Gramps Person ID. A person might have multiple IDs (for unmerged
> duplicates) in those systems. Or one system might contain expanded data the
> others don't and need to be periodically data-scraped.
>
> I seem to have wandered off-topic but the point is... re-defining IDs is a
> prime example of the laws of unexpected consequences. It isn't a question
> of whether there be breakage, but rather, what will be broken.
>
> -Brian
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:57, Richard Troxel
> <ric...@gm...> wrote:
> Thanks Brian!
> I have not shared my database as of this time. The few "draft" reports
> that I have distributed (published) do not include any Gramps Id's, so
> these are not really considerations.
>
> If I use the GEO Id's, should I change my Gramps ID Format settings? Does
> it hurt to have a mixture of Id's? I have already manually set up a number
> of enclosures. Part of me says that it would be less trouble to keep the
> Gramps Id's but I don't know if there is an advantage to the GEO Id's.
> Does that make sense?
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 10:42 AM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users <
> gra...@li...> wrote:
>
> For others not familiar with the gramplet:
> This option is in the section labeled  "Result/Edit view". This view
> appears after pressing Find button, showing of 10 rows of results.
>
> https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Addon:PlaceCleanupGramplet#Result.2FEdit_view
>
> Using the Original Gramps ID is strategic if you have copies of your tree
> out with other people doing edits. (Or perhaps you've published your Tree
> with the automatically generated Gramps IDs or Custom IDs.)
>
> When you compare/merge those Revised trees, having the same ID means a new
> item won't be added to your Place tree. It might save you from having to
> merge duplicate places with different IDs.
>
> Likewise, if you import data from other people (or files) already using a
> GeoNames standard ID, the databases is less likely to add duplicates if
> you're already using the the same standard ID naming.
>
> -Brian
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:16, Richard Troxel
> <ric...@gm...> wrote:
> I have just discovered this Gramplet and can definitely see its
> usefulness. I do have a question about certain options that it presents.
>
> In the WIKI it says,
> *ID* field. This field displays the Gramps ID. It cannot be edited. There
> is a small Orig checkbox just above this field, if checked, the Original
> ID from the place is used instead of the found ID. Note that this checkbox
> is disabled if there is no original ID.
> What are the pros and cons of using the GEO Id vs the original Gramps Id?
> What do you do?
>
> --
> Gramps-users mailing list
> Gra...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org
>
>