Additional info on shared people


Edward Sneithe
 

For a shared fact I include the following from the principals fact sentence to get basic information on the people sharing this fact. Is it possible to get additional information about the shared person from this point? I include the following in my sentence for the principal owner of the fact and this works fine:

<<br>       • Son: {role(single)=son}><<br>       • Sons: {role(plural)=son}>

In the FH GEDCOM file the share looks like this if the share points to a person in the file:

2 _SHAR @I2@
3 ROLE father
3 _SENT {individual} was father of {principal} < in the [date:YEAR] census>

and this if you just enter name for the shared person.

2 _SHAN Benny Goodman
3 ROLE administrator

In the first case FH must go to the specified individual to get the name. Does this make it at all possible to get additional information on the shared person like place, age, etc.?


Mike Tate
 

Yes, use the {date} {place} {age} codes as usual to get details of the witnessed fact.

 


Edward Sneithe
 

Mike this is from the sentence in the primary person who has the fact but I was wondering if I can get data from the role person?

For the primary fact I would say
<para>{value} was first owned by {principal} < {date}>< at {address}>< {place}>{=TextIf(Exists(%FACT._SHAR%) and Not(%FACT._SHAR.ROLE% = "Wife") or Exists(%FACT._SHAR[2]%)," Other heirs were:","")}<<br>   heirone: {role(single)=heirone}><<br>   heirones: {role(plural)=heirone}><para>

This will get me the name of the hir but can I get additional info about the specific heir. Can I get the detail of place of heirone, etc from the role not the primary fact holder?

On Wednesday, September 15, 2021, 01:13:08 PM EDT, Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:


Yes, use the {date} {place} {age} codes as usual to get details of the witnessed fact.

 


Mike Tate
 

It might be possible, but I don’t understand what you mean by the place of the heroine, etc.

Places are associate with facts, not people, so where are you hoping to extract that detail?

 

Mike

 


Edward Sneithe
 

I may be asking for too much and  I may have mis-spoken about the place but if I look at the fact that is generated in the roles  list of facts there is one that uses the sentence provided for in the Role definition. It also has a place, date, address, and note. So maybe I could access those? My thought was to be able to have a sentence that would identify the person by more than the ID so that a particular Joshua would be from Boston whereas the other Joshuas would be from different places

I may have another way to accomplish this but it MAY involve more work.

On Wednesday, September 15, 2021, 05:07:41 PM EDT, Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:


It might be possible, but I don’t understand what you mean by the place of the heroine, etc.

Places are associate with facts, not people, so where are you hoping to extract that detail?

 

Mike

 


Lorna Craig
 

Mike, it's not "heroine", it's "heirone" which I suspect is "heir one", as the sentence includes "Other heirs were:".

On 15/09/2021 22:07, Mike Tate wrote:

It might be possible, but I don’t understand what you mean by the place of the heroine, etc.

Places are associate with facts, not people, so where are you hoping to extract that detail?

 

Mike

 



Mike Tate
 

As a human, I understand the concept you are trying to achieve, but that has to be translated into a Sentence Template expression that FH understands.

 

The place, date, address, and note references that you mention all operate in the context of just the Principal fact.

 

To identify the Fact Witness person with more than Name and Record Id needs some other data to be extracted from that person’s record.

 

Where would the Place of Boston exist in the Joshua record?

Likewise, where would it exist in the other Joshua record?

Place details only appear in Facts.

So which Fact with an appropriate Place can you ensure exists in each Fact Witness person’s record.

 

Anyway, I think any such technique is doomed to failure as explained below.

 

Looking back at your original posting you refer to:

2 _SHAR @I2@
3 ROLE father
3 _SENT {individual} was father of {principal} < in the [date:YEAR] census>

That Sentence appears in father’s Narrative Report amongst all his other facts, so you know who the father is without needing extra identification in that Sentence.

What you might need is extra identification of the Principal where {principal} only provides the Name.

 

It is the Principal fact Sentence Template that needs the extra identity of Witnesses and the expressions that matter are the ones you posted later:

<<br>   heirone: {role(single)=heirone}><<br>   heirones: {role(plural)=heirone}>

The angle bracket conditional structure <<br>   heirone: {role(single)=heirone}> is only allowed one variable item in curly brackets which must be the {role…} item.

So any data reference to any other additional item such as {%CUR~WITN.NOTE2%} will not work because two variables items are not allowed.

Sometimes it is possible to replace an angle bracket conditional structure with the {=CombineText(…)} function but in this case the crucial {role…} item is not supported inside such functions.

 

If differentiating one Joshua Smith from another with more than just Record Id is important in the above contexts then it is probably important in other contexts.

So the only general solution I can offer is to add that differentiation to the Name field of each Joshua Smith.

e.g.

Name: Joshua /Smith/ from Boston

Name: Joshua /Smith/ from Chicago

Name: Joshua /Smith/ Junior

Name: Joshua /Smith/ Senior from Detroit

 

In reports and diagrams where you don’t want that suffix after the surname, then it should be possible to use one or other of the NAME qualifiers to exclude it.

 


Mike Tate
 

Sorry, it is the auto-correction at work!

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Lorna Craig via groups.io
Sent: 15 September 2021 23:21
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Additional info on shared people

 

Mike, it's not "heroine", it's "heirone" which I suspect is "heir one", as the sentence includes "Other heirs were:".

On 15/09/2021 22:07, Mike Tate wrote:

It might be possible, but I don’t understand what you mean by the place of the heroine, etc.

Places are associate with facts, not people, so where are you hoping to extract that detail?

 

Mike

 

 


Edward Sneithe
 

Thank you everyone. I suspected that I might be looking for something that can't be done;

First is the property Box for my test subject Adam Smith with the heirloom fact selected.

Inline image

This is the share screen for the heirloom fact for Adam Smith
Inline image

This is the property Box for Henry Smith one of the people in the share box for heirone.

Inline image

The original question was can I from the heirloom fact for Adam Smith reference data from the heirloom fact for Henry Smith who are linked by the sharing.  Asexample the sentence for the heirloom fact for A    Adam Smith would look like this:  ....  heirone: Henry Smith of Windsor Connecticut ...

I thought this would be a nice capability if possible but I detect that it is not possible.

This is just a test case so I see that I have spelling errors and grammar  in the data..

On Thursday, September 16, 2021, 05:58:11 AM EDT, Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:


Sorry, it is the auto-correction at work!

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Lorna Craig via groups.io
Sent: 15 September 2021 23:21
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Additional info on shared people

 

Mike, it's not "heroine", it's "heirone" which I suspect is "heir one", as the sentence includes "Other heirs were:".

On 15/09/2021 22:07, Mike Tate wrote:

It might be possible, but I don’t understand what you mean by the place of the heroine, etc.

Places are associate with facts, not people, so where are you hoping to extract that detail?

 

Mike

 

 


Mike Tate
 

As I tried to explain, the only way you can achieve that is by editing the Name: box in the Henry Smith record as follows:

 

Name: Henry /Smith/ of Windsor Connecticut

 

It is important to include both / characters to identify the surname.

 


Adrian Bruce
 

Edward - to try to reinforce what Mike has said, witness / shared
events can be difficult to get the head round, particularly when you
want to start adding bits to the sentences. Perhaps oddly, I found
that for me it became clearer when I looked at the GEDCOM file, where
you can see that in such a case, there is only ONE event in the file,
and it belongs to the Principal. (Don't actually try to open the
GEDCOM file yourself unless you know what you're doing).

The reason for me saying this is that you said "can I from the
heirloom fact for Adam Smith reference data from the heirloom fact for
Henry Smith who are linked by the sharing"

In the GEDCOM file, in your example, there is NO Heirloom fact for
Henry. I know it looks like it's there on the screen for Henry, and it
says "Windsor, Connecticut", but you're actually looking at Adam's
fact (the clue is the arrowhead in the left-hand column). So you can't
reference data from the heirloom fact for Henry Smith, because it's
actually the heirloom fact for Adam Smith.

Put another way, you can't link the two Windsor references, because
there is only one Windsor reference to start with - and it belongs to
Adam's heirloom fact.

What I would end up doing is adding to the Note for Adam's Heirloom
fact, by clarifying who the various people are in that note - for
instance, adding "This was Henry Smith, who was also from Windsor".

Adrian