Sorry, Don. I thought that we were not yet converging on clarity (much less on agreement), and I thought I was adding something that had not yet been expressed. But I'll reply off-list to Ron Taylor's response (which is a fair point but I still disagree).
-----Original Message----- From: Don Hendershot Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 11:33 AM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] marriages Why does this thread continue ad mausium? Please exchange E-Mails and take it off-line! It was already old last week. ~Don On Jun 23, 2013, at 8:49 AM, "Ward Walker" <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, if we are reasonably clear on the underlying database structure and > the > use of a 'marriage' record for any relationship that produces a child, let > me ask this: what would be the precise meaning of adding a specific > database > flag (i.e., a checkbox for the individual) that says the person did not > marry? Such a flag could not have a biological context, but rather would > have a cultural meaning, certainly subject to interpretation. Wouldn't > some > people interpret it as referring to religious weddings, only. Other people > would include official civil weddings. What about couples that have lived > together common law for 40 years, with no wedding? Would checking the box > include or exclude that? What about a marriage that is annulled after 10 > days? > > My point is that such observations belong in Notes or Event/Facts, where > they can be explained in context. Having a database construct is only > useful > for such things as generating a symbol next to the name in Family view, or > for automatically adding a statement in a report (with hard-coded > wording), > or possibly for a search criterion. Such a database construct/checkbox > should only be used for a fact that is well-defined and not subject to > personal interpretation. > > To me, even the current checkbox has limited usefulness, for the same > reasons. It is helpful for the 'no children' part of it. And perhaps the > 'not marry' part can sometimes be a helpful research aid to save me from > searching records for an official marriage that is somehow already known > not > to exist. But notes can do that too. > > Ward > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Rolfe Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
