newFamilySearch Pedigree Display Record

[garysturn]

The problems with having every one enter an opinion:

-The folders fill up fast, when you get back several generations there are 1000's of decendents.
-When every person needs to enter an opinion it adds to the folder. Full folders load very slow.
-The current software works on a sort. So you would have to rewrite the program to use a voting system or ranking system.
-We need to come up with a better sort so the most popular submitted version of a name or event appears ahead of an alphabetical sort so everyone does not need to add another opinion to get the best submission to display.

I think we are trying to make this too complicated. Why not allow users to select the names dates and places they think are most correct. Those of us who have done research should know which is correct. The number of selections could be tabulated and the option with the most votes rises to the top. The membership record SHOULD be the most correct, of course, but in those cases where there is no membership record, using whichever name comes first alphabetically makes no sense. It would be better to put the names with no surname at the BOTTOM of the list rather than the top. We KNOW those aren't correct or complete.

We might also give consideration to the fact that some people went by more than one name - patronymic, natural, adopted, nicknames (some people never used their given names). I like to use the format
Given Name(s) OR Nickname OR Foreign Name OR any other name used / Patronymic Name OR Surname OR Foreign Spelling of Name OR Adopted Name/--- whichever apply. PAF and nFS both support the use of OR to separate names. That way you can cover all the options on one line. nFS allows the editing of parts of names to be either given names or surnames, which can be changed if nFS interprets the name incorrectly. I see lots of entries where the name is spelled in ways which the person never used in his/her life. Those are the ones that should be disputed. Most of the others are differing combinations of the above assortment I have listed. Sometimes people went by names of step-fathers even though they were never adopted. Marriage records for second marriages usually show the wife using her first husband's surname. Diacritics in a foreign name are sometimes interpreted differently by different members of a family when the family immigrates. My Dutch ancestors used their patronymic name for a middle name for over 50 years after they adopted surnames. Perhaps the name should be broken down and identified whether each one is foreign, adopted, patronymic, nickname, etc. So the question is IS THERE REALLY ONE CORRECT OPTION FOR NAMES?

[garysturn]

The current system does elevate the personal opinion over the alphabetical listing, but only that person sees it elevated. But every user has a different user name so their personal opinion is elevated and if they do not have a personal opinion they get the A-Z Sort. How would you determine which personal opinion is to be elevated if you were to elevate someone elses opinion.

Another simple method is to simply elevate personal opinion over alphabetical listing. That way the second person to come in will see by default the opinion of the first and won't have to enter another opinion just to get the same name to appear at the top. Now, what to do when there are conflicting opinions .... I don't know.

[garysturn]

A short term solution that would take very few programming changes would be to come up with a sort that would display the correct name. Once the most correct name is displayed there would then be no need for everyone to express an opinion to get the correct info to elevate to the top of the list.

The only programming changes needed would be to change the sort.

Then future updates could display entries which differ from the most correct name in a different color so the user knows his submission is different from the most correct submission (or most submitted version). This would require more time because more advanced programming changes would be needed.

[russellhltn]

The current system does elevate the personal opinion over alphabetical listing.

But only for the user who entered it. My suggestion is to elevate anyone's personal opinion over the alphabetical for everyone. In other words, as soon as a personal opinion has been entered, the alphabetical sort is a non-issue for everyone. So long as that personal opinion satisfies everyone else, that's just one additional record. (Much like your system)

In the case of multiple personal opinions, one's own opinion will still out rank everyone else's. Users who haven't entered an opinion will see the most recent opinion. That last rule is still somewhat arbitrary, but since the owners of the prior entries are less likely to notice the change (since their own opinion will out-rank later opinions) it should avoid a tussle over the "right" way. At any rate, the number of additional records created will still be smaller then under the current system.

It's not perfect, but the programming changes are minimal (no additional record types, no new entry screens, etc. It's just a new "search result") and it's better then what we have now.

Allow any user to edit this record.

That's the part that I don't think is workable. If anyone can change it, then it will turn into a tug-of-war between users. It also violates what seems to be an underlying principle of nFS where anyone can dispute another's information but they can't change it.

[garysturn]

So if I understand your suggestion, you are saying, change the sort order to.

(Personal Submission) if none (LDS Membership Record) if none (The Most Recent Submission) then (A-Z Sort)

I agree that that would work most of the time and would be a great improvement until something better were developed. That is a possible short term solution. (Currently every time someone expresses a personal opinion it becomes another submission to the folder and gets sorted alphabetically for all users except for the person who entered it)

Wouldn't an even better sort change be to add the (Most Submitted) order to the sort. RE: The version of a name in the folder which has the most contribuitors of that version. See Example.

(Personal Submission) if none (LDS Membership Record) if none (Most Submitted) then (A-Z Sort)

Example Sorts:

Current Sort: (When no personal submission or LDS Membership record exists)
Howard Doe (1) Submission
John (1) Submission
John Doe (1) Submission
John H. Doe (5) Submissions
John Howard Doe (45) Submissions
Jon Howard Doe (1) Submission

Proposed Sort:
John Howard Doe (45) Submissions
John H. Doe (5) Submissions
Howard Doe (1) Submission
John (1) Submission
John Doe (1) Submission
Jon Howard Doe (1) Submission

... My suggestion is to elevate anyone's personal opinion over the alphabetical for everyone. In other words, as soon as a personal opinion has been entered, the alphabetical sort is a non-issue for everyone. So long as that personal opinion satisfies everyone else, that's just one additional record. (Much like your system)

In the case of multiple personal opinions, one's own opinion will still out rank everyone else's. Users who haven't entered an opinion will see the most recent opinion. That last rule is still somewhat arbitrary, but since the owners of the prior entries are less likely to notice the change (since their own opinion will out-rank later opinions) it should avoid a tussle over the "right" way. At any rate, the number of additional records created will still be smaller than under the current system.

It's not perfect, but the programming changes are minimal (no additional record types, no new entry screens, etc. It's just a new "search result") and it's better than what we have now.

Note: I edited and changed this entry (on Nov 18th) after realizing an Official record added to each folder would create multiple Offical records every time more names are combined. I removed the paragraph below and show added text in red.

This was Removed:
At some point there will need to be an official display record sorted at the same level as the (LDS Membership Record) for all individuals without an (LDS Membership Record). How that data is updated would need to be determined.

[russellhltn]

So if I understand your suggestion, you are saying, change the sort order to.

(Personal Submission) if none (LDS Membership Record) if none (The Most Recent Submission) then (A-Z Sort)

Correct.

At some point there will need to be an official display record sorted at the same level as the (LDS Membership Record) for all individuals without an (LDS Membership Record). How that data is updated would need to be determined.

Along the same lines, at some point we'll have to decide which of many husbands a woman has been sealed to will be the "real one". But that may not come until the Millennium.

Until then, I'm not sure as we'll ever have an official name for someone that humans can work out and agree to. Among the issues are people who have legally changed their names, perhaps "Americanized" it after immigrating, people who's names are written in characters of another language, etc. I suspect any "official" name would have to allow for multiple names or at least aliases. I'm content to let others debate that issue.

While my idea is less then perfect, I think it's "good enough" for now. At least it stops all these personal opinions from being needlessly added and bloat the database.

[garysturn]

I now agree with you that we can not have an Official record in each folder.

Note: I edited and changed some of my previous messages on Nov 18th after realizing an Official record added to each folder would create multiple Offical records every time more names are combined.

See my previous message: (revised comment in Red)

As to the Linked parents and spouses, the (Most Submitted) version added to the sort would be the best name to display in the pedigrees. Of course a (Personal Submission) would be displayed first for those with a different submission from the most popular.

Along the same lines, at some point we'll have to decide which of many husbands a woman has been sealed to will be the "real one". But that may not come until the Millennium.

Until then, I'm not sure as we'll ever have an official name for someone that humans can work out and agree to. Among the issues are people who have legally changed their names, perhaps "Americanized" it after immigrating, people who's names are written in characters of another language, etc. I suspect any "official" name would have to allow for multiple names or at least aliases. I'm content to let others debate that issue.

While my idea is less then perfect, I think it's "good enough" for now. At least it stops all these personal opinions from being needlessly added and bloat the database.

[JamesAnderson]

Might there be a way to choose from more than one view to see at any given time, just one view at a time and then switch over to see what one of the other views looks like.

By example I know of a broadcasting website that posts the ratings nearly every month or at lesser intervals showing how popular radio stations are in a given market. The default view is most popular at the top and descending to lowest rated station in the market. But you can click on a column and regroup the results to show by ownership, or even how things stacked up in one of the earlier ratings periods.

With NFS, one could select the personal view, then if they wanted they could see what everyone else sees of their data (good for a variety of reasons), and maybe one or two other alternate views. Something like this could be very useful. Would take some programming though to set up the database sorts to give the desired results one would get when clicking on one of the sub tabs to select a view.

[tmason1-p40]

In nFS the is the ability to "Change View". In the "Family Pedigree with Details" view and the "Family Pedigree" view, the patron can select in the Individual details to "View Summary" or "View or Add Details".

However, try the "Change View" option and select the "Family Group Record" view. There is no ability to change which "preferred" name is displayed for the person on the Family Group record. This problem kind of forces the issue, doesn't it?

[rmrichesjr]

...

With NFS, one could select the personal view, then if they wanted they could see what everyone else sees of their data (good for a variety of reasons), and maybe one or two other alternate views. Something like this could be very useful. Would take some programming though to set up the database sorts to give the desired results one would get when clicking on one of the sub tabs to select a view.

In nFS the is the ability to "Change View". In the "Family Pedigree with Details" view and the "Family Pedigree" view, the patron can select in the Individual details to "View Summary" or "View or Add Details".

However, try the "Change View" option and select the "Family Group Record" view. There is no ability to change which "preferred" name is displayed for the person on the Family Group record. This problem kind of forces the issue, doesn't it?

If I remember correctly from the beta several months ago, there is an option somewhere to select whether the system will display only what I (the current user) have submitted vs. display everything regardless of source. Perhaps a solution to the issue of this thread would be to split the latter option into two: display everything but give priority to my own submissions (the current mode); display everything the same way everyone else sees it.