* Quick Child/Family Snapshot

[arthurk]

This is coming along nicely, though I'm not getting any Birth or Death details on any of the options.

Meanwhile, while you were producing this, I've been experimenting with a mock-up in Word to see if I could reduce the duplication I mentioned before. (I didn't try to replicate the outlines of the panes - this is just for the general idea.) I don't know whether this layout would work in the plugin, but what do you think?

Features I've tried to incorporate are:

• Highlight of Root Individual (though comparing this with Mike's latest version, I think his Italics are probably better)
  One colour for Root's parents and full-blood siblings
  Separate colour for each Partner, and same for Children with that partner
  Black for half-siblings and in-laws

ak-qfss2.jpg (43.38 KiB) Viewed 12598 times

For ease I produced a minimal version without BMD Details, but presumably there could be options to expand as in Mike's.

Arthur

[Valkrider]

Mike

The first partner is in the same colour as the Root person which is a bit odd given the other colours used. It makes it less obvious who the Root is with just the italic to identify them. Personally I would like the Root person to be in a unique colour and the others a different colour.

Should the birth and death be shown in full like the marriage? If so they are not showing for me for either 'Full' or 'Brief'?

[tatewise]

Sorry, I did not spot the missing Birth/Death facts in Version 0.4.
So try the attached Version 0.5 Date 11 Dec 2106.
[Attachment deleted as now in Plugin Store under the title Quick Family Facts.]

It also uses one colour for the nuclear family of Father, Mother, Individual, Siblings, 1st Partner & Children.
Still just playing with ideas.
The Individual box always lists the key root person first, but it is the whole family that is of interest.

Colin, I took your idea of having same colour but different style (underline/italics).

Arthur, I suspect your layout gets more complex with facts included.
Each person needs Birth/Baptism/Death/Burial, and leaves the dilemma of where to put Marriage/Divorce.
Also how would you deal with Partners with multiple Partners themselves?

[arthurk]

Birth/Death facts seem fine in the latest version (0.5), thank you.

Arthur, I suspect your layout gets more complex with facts included.
Each person needs Birth/Baptism/Death/Burial, and leaves the dilemma of where to put Marriage/Divorce.

I was anticipating that Birth/Baptism/Death/Burial would go immediately below the names as in your layout, and Marriage too for the Siblings. For the root individual, since his/her family as partner/parent is in the right-hand pane, I would think that's the place to put his/her full Partner/Marriage/Divorce details. If they were replicated on the left (like the other siblings' marriages etc), could it be in such a way that they never expand to show full details, on the grounds that they appear elsewhere?

Also how would you deal with Partners with multiple Partners themselves?

Errr, I hadn't got as far as that, but I would think in the same way as yours, eg, one man with two wives: make either wife the root, and the other wife appears against the husband as well. (In theory you could go on ad infinitum with multiple partners, and their multiple partners etc etc, but where you've stopped looks right to me.)

Arthur

[arthurk]

Perhaps I've been a bit too dismissive of Mike's efforts - on further thought, the options regarding BMD events do help considerably in making a more compact output, so unless it's thought preferable to re-arrange things as per my suggestion, I'm happy to let it drop and leave Mike to continue on the path he's on.

However, I have noticed what Mike described here:

Where no actual Dates exist for any of the key events, it uses estimated life dates preceded by a tilde (~) as explained in the =LifeDates2(...) function with the "EXT" option, which takes account of other Facts including those of relatives, and your Tools > Preferences > Estimates.

Is there (or could there be) a way to turn off the "EXT" option? It's giving me people with a possible age span of 134 years. I realise this is mainly due to gaps in my research, but until I manage to fill them, I'd prefer to see no dates rather than ones that are fairly obviously wrong.

Arthur

[tatewise]

The =LifeDates2(...) function "STD" option only uses actual event Dates.
Rather than more options, is there a consensus that "STD" would be better than "EXT"?

Arthur, the other aspect I forgot to mention is the scroll-bars on the separate panes.
Especially when there are many Siblings or Children, then their panes can be scrolled independently from the parents, whereas it is not clear how that would work in your example screenshot.

BTW: I like the idea of (m.1789) with the LifeDates, or perhaps incorporated into them (1765-1789-1834) and if none are known then ( - - ).

[arthurk]

Arthur, the other aspect I forgot to mention is the scroll-bars on the separate panes.
Especially when there are many Siblings or Children, then their panes can be scrolled independently from the parents, whereas it is not clear how that would work in your example screenshot.

Good point - one that I hadn't thought of. Another reason for you to press on with your version...

BTW: I like the idea of (m.1789) with the LifeDates, or perhaps incorporated into them (1765-1789-1834) and if none are known then ( - - ).

I don't think I've ever seen a marriage date incorporated in life dates like that, and I think it would be better to stick with well-established conventions. If only two out of birth, marriage and death were known, you might get (1765-1789-) or (-1789-1834), which I'd find very confusing; and if there was more than one marriage, could it end up with something like (1765-1789-1805-1820-1834)?

[Wilfreda99]

I think the STD option would be preferable, as Arthur says it is confusing to have people with apparently huge life spans. Presumably the STD option would include dates that are Calc, or Est, or quarterly?

Is 'Partner' a standard Fact or have you created a custom one? If so will it be picked up? Also how about 'Separated' rather than Divorced. My son lived with his partner for 20 years and they have now split up; they would not like to be described as married and divorced if I produced a family tree, say for their sons' school projects.

[Valkrider]

Mike I am with the others I do not like the idea of date-date-date but I do like the idea of (m.1789).

[tatewise]

I will try putting the (m.1789) format after each = Spouse NAME but probably only when No BMD Facts option is chosen.

BTW: Now that such Spouse NAMES are always bold and often coloured, is the = prefix needed?

The STD life-dates option does cope with all Date formats.

I will add Separated to the Family Events along with Marriage and Divorce.
(P.S. Just realised Separated is NOT a standard Event so cannot include that, sorry.)

Wilfreda, Partners is no more a Fact than Father, Mother, Siblings or Children. They are the family relationship headings to the chosen root Individual. I prefer Partners to Spouses as they may not be married. Be assured they will work for you, just like all the other users in this thread, Download the Plugin and give it a try.

I am also working on tidying up the layout, so when the window is enlarged, the panes expand equitably for the number of lines in each pane.

[arthurk]

I will try putting the (m.1789) format after each = Spouse NAME but probably only when No BMD Facts option is chosen.

That seems reasonable.

BTW: Now that such Spouse NAMES are always bold and often coloured, is the = prefix needed?

I feel it helps, but what do others think?

Are you still looking for an alternative name for this plugin, or have you settled on something?

[PeterR]

I agree that the = prefix for each spouse is very helpful.

It's handy that the current plugin name begins with "Q" thus allowing the use of the keyboard shortcut Alt T Q.

Incidentally, the current version 0.5 still has "0.4" in its Title.

[arthurk]

It's handy that the current plugin name begins with "Q" thus allowing the use of the keyboard shortcut Alt T Q.

Having a rarely-used initial letter does help for the shortcut, but would it be easier for people to find in the Plugin Store if it started with Family?

[PeterR]

Doesn't the Plugin Store have a search capability? "Family" wouldn't have to come first in the name.

[arthurk]

Doesn't the Plugin Store have a search capability? "Family" wouldn't have to come first in the name.

Yes it does, but "Family" doesn't seem very helpful as a search term. Currently there are said to be 76 plugins in the store, and when I tried searching for this I got 25 results, which is still quite a lot to wade through.

Some of these, presumably, are because "Family" will find any reference to the name of the program, and with some others, "Family" didn't occur in the title or description of the plugin at all - I can only assume it was picking up links to forum posts etc from the bottom of the page.

(As a more general question, how would I go about suggesting that the plugin store is set out in categories, or that plugins should have tags to assist in filtering etc?)

[tatewise]

Try the attachment Quick Family Facts Plugin Version 0.6 Date 15 Dec 2016.
[Attachment deleted as now in Plugin Store.]

Note the change of name if you are using the Alt T Q shortcut.

Is this a less confusing name than Quick Family Snapshot?

This adds (m.1789) after each = Spouse NAME when in No BMD Events mode.
All (Life-Dates) are now based only on actual BMD Event Dates.

There is a Root Italics/Underline style option for Root Person's name in Root Person, Partners & Siblings panes.
There is a Root Parents/Children colour option for Root Person's name in the Partners pane.
All those options and the window size & position are all 'sticky'.

The vertical size of each row of panes is now proportional to their contents, so as the window is enlarged, the vertical scroll bar should vanish at about the same point in all panes to leave a neater display.
Does this work OK for very large numbers of Siblings or Children?

Regarding the Plugin Store Search, you are correct that it seems to find more than it should.
Plugins already have a Keywords option that authors may use to supplement the Search.
However, it is odd that Build a Tree from a CSV and Check for new Search The Internet settings and others match Family and also Historian when they don't mention either word at all?
Use the usual how_to:about#problem_reporting|> Problem Reporting methods to tell Calico Pie about that and request Plugin Store Categories. I requested that years ago when FH V5 introduced Plugins, but it is worth asking again.

[arthurk]

Many thanks, Mike - this latest version 0.6 seems just right to me, and the change of name seems appropriate.

I'll follow up the plugin store issue as you suggest.

[arthurk]

Quick follow-up to my off-topic comment about the Plugin Store:

I've reported the issue with apparently too many results when searching for "Family", and also made the suggestion of arranging plugins into categories, or using tags or keywords to allow filtering. Calico Pie responded very promptly, as follows:

Thank you for your feedback, I have made a note for the next revision of the plugin store, it's possible "Family" occurs in comments or in the source code of the plugin.

[MarkB]

I just installed 0.6
Got error
...path\Quick Family Facts.fh_lua:173 bad argument #1 to 'IsSame' (fh.PITEM expected, got nil). No changes have been made to data.

[tatewise]

Sorry, try attachment Quick Family Facts Plugin Version 0.7 Date 15 Dec 2016.
[Attachment deleted as now in Plugin Store.]

It appears that FH V5 is not tolerant of a nil argument for 'IsSame' whereas FH V6 is OK.

Regarding the Calico Pie feedback about Plugin Store, it is true that family appears in the Source of Build Tree From CSV File but it also matches historian and that does NOT appear in its Source, or anywhere else for that Plugin!
Also Search and Return Result Set matches both family & historian but neither appear anywhere including within Source!
So I think Calico Pie need to explain those anomalies.
It would be very odd if the Source code was included in the Search as that would include a vast array of words.

[tatewise]

This latest Plugin V0.7 has options for:
Root Italics/Underline style for Root Person's name in Root Person, Partners & Siblings panes.
Root Parents/Children colour for Root Person's name in the Partners pane.

I am hoping to avoid the need for those options in the published version, so would welcome comments on which alternatives are preferable, and will go with the majority decision.

[PeterR]

Thanks for all this, Mike.

I much prefer just underline for the Root; I find italics slightly less legible, and the underline is much easier to spot amongst a long list of siblings.

I also much refer the Root to appear in the same colour as his or her Parents; that way the Root has the same colour everywhere. Otherwise a Root with two or more partners will appear in three or more different colours.

[brianlummis]

My vote would also be for Underline Style (no italics) for Root Person's name and Parent's colour.

Brian

[arthurk]

I agree with Peter and Brian - underline rather than italic, and have the root the same colour wherever s/he appears.

[Valkrider]

I also agree that the underline looks better.

I think there may also be a little bug because on selecting 'Root Only Underline' the heading in each box also get an underline so Root Person, Partner and Siblings are affected but not Father and Mother. Can this underline be turned off on anything other than the Root persons name?