|
|
Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, December 10, 2007
Posts: 72,
Visits: 426
|
When i put a marriage as annulled i get this in the report (minor but still a bug)
Rodney Keith and unkown were married. Their marriage was annulledThey were divorced. They have a son and a daughter, named Chris and Amy.
Male Chris
Female Amy
also in the tree with 2b17
when i put the couple as divorced i no longer get the // through the marriage line
Edited: Thursday, August 10, 2006 by
GenoProSupport
|
|
|
Customers Important Contributors GenoPro version: 3.1.0.1
Last Login: 12 hours ago
Posts: 440,
Visits: 7,488
|
crash893 (8/9/2006) also in the tree with 2b17
when i put the couple as divorced i no longer get the // through the marriage line
I am using 2b17i and the divorce line (and the other Relation lines) are displaying correctly.
|
|
|
Administrators Moderators Customers Gamma FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com Translator GenoPro version: 3.1.0.1
Last Login: 4 hours ago
Posts: 4,887,
Visits: 22,770
|
You need to explicitly pick the Divorce relationship to display the // on the family tree. The Unions dialog documents the events but has no effect on the display.
|
|
|
Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, December 10, 2007
Posts: 72,
Visits: 426
|
why not
if they are divorced they are divorced
why do i need to mark it in multiable spots
what about the space issue?
Edited: Sunday, August 13, 2006 by
crash893
|
|
|
Important Contributors FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com Customers Translator GenoPro version: 2.0.1.6
Last Login: Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Posts: 390,
Visits: 1,271
|
The following phrase “PhDivorce”, to my opinion, is actually not finished:
<!-- 0=marriage annulment, 1=divorce date, 2=divorce place, 3=divorce requested by --> <PhDivorce T="{  }[{?0}Their marriage was annulled][{?!0}They were divorced{1}{2h}][{?3}They were divorced]." /> |
because the 4 fields: “Requested by”, “Husband’s Attorney”, “Wife’s Attorney” and “Officiator / Agency” are presently not included/taken into account in the phrase. Or is it done on purpose? Same, of course, applies to the associated code line 193 of Lang.vbs. I suppose this is another wee job for Ron. I also agree that, as soon as something (the “Marriage Annulled” tick box or any/some of the other fields) has been input within the “Divorce” section, the connecting line and the “Relation” field on the Gene tab, should automatically update to a divorce (or also possibly Nullity) type union. In fact, I even suggest that this field “Relation”, if possible within the system, be totally interactive, based on the various input fields of the divorce section but also in case of one Ind dies, the Relation field should also auto-update from, say, a Legal Cohab into a Legal Cohab and Deceased.
Edited: Friday, August 18, 2006 by
GenoProSupport
|
|
|
Administrators Customers Important Contributors FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com GenoPro version: 3.1.0.1
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:03 AM
Posts: 3,397,
Visits: 26,163
|
Yes I had picked up on the original post from crash893 modified the phrase to <!-- 0=marriage annulment, 1=divorce date, 2=divorce place, 3=divorce requested by --> <PhDivorce T="{  }[{?0}Their marriage was annulled][{?!0}[{?1|2|3}They were divorced]]{1}{2h}[ at the request of {3}]." />
| ready for Beta 18 but I seem to have overlooked responding to the post. I'll take another look and include the attorneys and officiators/agencies. The relation field was perhaps originally intended for use when there was no marriage/divorce information present. I will look at the report a see if I can change it so that the family relationship line pattern reflects the state of the union if the relation field is blank. Perhaps Dan could add a check in Genopro and flag a warning when the relation value contradicts the 'union' status and also use the union status for the line when left blank. The 'union' object also needs to be extended to record relationship states other than marriage & divorce/annulment. e.g. dating, engagement, cohabitation etc. Maybe it could be extended to cover all 'family' events.
'lego audio video erro ergo disco' or "I read, I listen, I watch, I make mistakes, therefore I learn"
|
|
|
Important Contributors FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com Customers Translator GenoPro version: 2.0.1.6
Last Login: Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Posts: 390,
Visits: 1,271
|
Thanks Ron.Don't forget, in Lang.vbs, to remove <> "" at the very end of the parameters list, otherwise it says:
|
|
|
Important Contributors FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com Customers Translator GenoPro version: 2.0.1.6
Last Login: Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Posts: 390,
Visits: 1,271
|
Another small remark: when the option “Don’t Know” is selected, the narrative says:
I simply suggest to remove this option from the drop down list.
|
|
|
Forum Members GenoPro version: FTPClient1
Last Login: Monday, April 5, 2021
Posts: 72,
Visits: 611
|
Or change it to read "at the request of one of the two" or something like that.
|
|
|
Administrators Moderators Customers Gamma FamilyTrees.GenoPro.com Translator GenoPro version: 3.1.0.1
Last Login: 4 hours ago
Posts: 4,887,
Visits: 22,770
|
Ron (8/14/2006) Perhaps Dan could add a check in Genopro and flag a warning when the relation value contradicts the 'union' status and also use the union status for the line when left blank.GenoPro 3.0 will have a Problem Spotter to display warnings of potential errors such as the birth of a child before its parents, a child with more than two biological parents, divorce date prior marriage date, etc. I have added this suggestion to our Problem Spotter list.
|