Family Historian User Group

I've been playing with the new FamilySearch "other relationships" capability and would like FH to adopt some of this.

see https://www.familysearch.org/tree/perso ... s/GK3N-LRB

In FS you enter it once and it creates a two-way area to put in notes, events and sources. This is editable from either person. The only thing I find lacking is the ability to assign roles to each person.
I would like to see FH create a similar capability and display it in the focus window below the spouses and children.

I have added the Associates tab created by Mike Tate, but, as you know, it is one way, so I have to create the link on each person etc.

I've done a little work around by creating a fake spouse to add these possible children but is not ideal.
I require this for matching up people who might be the same person, people who might be siblings, people whose relationship is not yet clear but keep popping up.

In the current case, James married in 1818. First children found on 1841 census were born 1827-1838. There is an obvious gap but I've not found any of the children in church baptisms. I'm searching now for people of that name, born in that place, that cannot be associated with any other family... and looking for documentation that would seem to confirm a relationship.

In FS you enter it once and it creates a two-way area to put in notes, events and sources. This is editable from either person. The only thing I find lacking is the ability to assign roles to each person.

Yes, I think that your comment about the inability to assign roles goes to the crux of the matter and explains why I would not want Associations in FH to be bi-directional yet.

If I read that screen-shot right, there is nothing to indicate which is the parent and which is the child. (OK, it's ***** obvious which is which based on the fact that both entries are dated but that might not always be the case.)

Suppose the Association is "Employer-Employee" and Arthur Brown is at one end of the Association and Charles Daniels is at the other. If entering "Arthur Brown" / "Employer-Employee" / "Charles Daniels" creates "Charles Daniels" / "Employer-Employee" / "Arthur Brown" automatically - who is the employee and who the employer? At the moment, because I have to enter the reverse Association manually, I can enter "Arthur Brown" / "Employer-Employee" / "Charles Daniels" and (separately) "Charles Daniels" / "Employee-Employer" / "Arthur Brown". That's not exactly 100% clear because it does rely on me remembering that I've written the Association name in a meaningful fashion.

A better way of doing it might be to add roles so that I enter "Arthur Brown" (role = Employer) / "Employer-Employee" / "Charles Daniels" (role = Employee) and then the system could automatically generate the reverse "Charles Daniels" (role = Employee) / "Employer-Employee" / "Arthur Brown" (role = Employer).

(Database Designers - yes, I know. I'm just trying to keep within the GEDCOM Association....)