Damon, I am afraid I am not sure what you mean by pedigree.
Look at my recent post Jumping into streams <https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/tiddlywiki/VxXNkf92k4A> it includes a simple TOC via recursive code, I expect if you come to understand that you should be able to handle your recursive processes. A Little more complex is the existing toc macros $:/core/macros/toc, in part because they protect you from becoming your own grandfather, but they involve a single parent tree by tag. Tidgraph is simple in someways, so I believe it could be rebuilt by other means. Particularly a css based way to represent any list like tiddgraph. After all a nested button list is basically the same thing without the lines. Not that I know CSS enough, others do. Regards Tony On Monday, June 29, 2020 at 12:55:15 PM UTC+10, Damon Pritchett wrote: > > Thanks Tony. I really do appreciate your insight. I will be the first to > admit that I have a lot to learn. > > I actually started this little project using a separate field for mother > and father, but I switched to tags because it was easier to make it work > with Tidgraph. I couldn’t quite figure out how to make it use only those > two fields and not the others (birth, death, etc.) I did make it work with > a parents field with the mother and father separated by a “;” bit I really > didn’t like that for obvious reasons. Tidgraph worked well with the two > tags because I could specify mode=“tags[]” and all was well since they were > the only tags I intended to use. Using fields[] instead would have listed > all fields and stopped there. Tidgraph is the easiest way to generate a > pedigree chart. > > Once I got that, then I went to work on the “children of” list. Since I > already went down the tag path, I stuck with it. Generating a descendant > list was easy with the toc macros, but they couldn’t include the spouses so > I rolled my own. I will not claim it is the best approach. Just easiest at > the time and it served my purpose. I wasn’t looking to replace my > genealogy program; just provide a quick snapshot for reference. > > Having said all of that, I’m definitely open to ideas and look forward to > seeing your ideas and TT’s as well. > > Now a question. If I were to go back to mother and father fields, how > could I get similar looking results for both pedigree and children? That’s > where I got stuck in the first place. > > Damon > > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 7:29 PM TW Tones <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Damon, >> >> The reason I suggested against tags is you then have to differentiate >> between tags. On the surface there is no immediate difference between a >> mother or father-name tag. This can be solved, but if a person had a mother >> and father field, it would be unambiguous. With TOCP you can use other >> fields. What if you wanted to add a clan tag?, this would also need >> checking. >> >> However genealogy can get seriously complex, Lets see if TT/Josiah takes >> the bait and shares some of his resources so far. >> >> I do intend to provide the tools one day for a full and sophisticated >> genealogical tree, consider step children, second spouse, birth date and >> multiple marriages and death. What is the implication of twins and and >> multiple birth?, well in my family tree it allowed us to to identify a >> whole tree of relatives even although the father was unknown. Multiple >> births are an example of proven FULL siblings. >> >> However it will take some time, because I am collecting the mechanisms to >> make it highly extensible and support other networks and hierarchies as >> well. >> >> Needless to say it will use tocp, Kin, and recursion and possible GenTags. >> >> Regards >> Tony >> >> >> On Monday, June 29, 2020 at 10:48:04 AM UTC+10, Damon Pritchett wrote: >>> >>> Hey Tony, >>> >>> I have done quite a bit of searching and, at least so far, I have found >>> no solutions to the problem I was trying to address, just comments on how >>> difficult the problem is when there are bi-lineal relationships. >>> >>> I may not have put enough explanation in my initial post. What I might >>> not be making clear (see "children of" picture) is that Person 1 is, say, >>> the father and Persons 2 & 3 are the mothers. Persons 4 and 5 have the same >>> "father," but not the same mother. That's why I have the word "with" before >>> the names. >>> >>> I played with Kin filter to replicate what I had and couldn't quite get >>> there. I came close, but couldn't get past the "flatness" of the lists >>> generated by the kin filter Maybe I gave up too soon, but since I had a >>> solution that worked, I didn't want to spend any further time on it. >>> >>> I've used the TOCP plugin a lot in my wikis and love it. At this point, >>> I don't see the problem changing whether I use fields or tags, but I could >>> be wrong. I used tags for this because of the operators tags and tagging >>> which made things relatively easy. >>> >>> Damon >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, June 28, 2020 at 5:02:02 PM UTC-7, TW Tones wrote: >>>> >>>> Damon, >>>> >>>> One way to use the kin filter is to use one kin filter and add or >>>> subtract the titles from another kin filter. so you could subtract your >>>> family (your parents below) from that below your grandparents family the >>>> result will be you aunts uncles cousins etc.. >>>> >>>> If using tags to indicate parentage you have to check the the parent to >>>> determine if they are father or mother, to to make sure the tags is not >>>> for >>>> something else. I suggest moving relationships into fields not tags (If >>>> you >>>> had not already). >>>> >>>> Also the TOCP plugin or a variation along with the kin filter operating >>>> on fields rather than tags is possibly the way to go building a >>>> genealogical tree. Do Search the forum, TT and others have done a lot of >>>> genealogical work with Tiddlywiki. >>>> >>>> You will find in the forums recursive toc and macros discussed a few >>>> times that could help you build a full system that iterates trees. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Tony >>>> >>>> On Monday, June 29, 2020 at 6:14:02 AM UTC+10, Damon Pritchett wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I've played around with the kin filter today and it is a fine >>>>> replacement for part of what I wrote. However, (see the Person 1 picture >>>>> for reference) to show the children of Person one along with the >>>>> spouse/partner who was the other parent of the given child, takes the >>>>> additional steps that I took in my code. The Kin filter cannot do this by >>>>> itself. The Kin filter will list all of the descendants for Person 1, but >>>>> that list is a flat list and has no hierarchy to it and will not list the >>>>> spouses because they are not direct descendants (at least, I haven't been >>>>> able to figure out how to do it). >>>>> >>>>> Damon >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, June 27, 2020 at 9:47:48 PM UTC-7, Damon Pritchett wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Saq, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have used it before and it just never occurred to me to use it in >>>>>> this aspect. Thanks for the reminder. I will look into that tomorrow. >>>>>> What >>>>>> I did was a great learning experience for me but kin filter will likely >>>>>> work better. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> >>>>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/ckbmFxV4gRk/unsubscribe. >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected] <javascript:>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c8fdd6bd-972a-46d3-bcd8-0cbd3f429e21o%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c8fdd6bd-972a-46d3-bcd8-0cbd3f429e21o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f3112f86-582c-4989-8d04-f8443040752co%40googlegroups.com.
